Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) formula in secondary scleral fixation using the Yamane technique: a retrospective comparison of intraocular lens power calculation formulas

OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) 2.0 with Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff/Theoretical (SRK/T), Hoffer Q and Barrett Universal II (BUII) intraocular lens power calculation formulas in eyes that have undergone scleral fixation in Yamane technique. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this retrospective study, patients undergoing secondary intraocular lens fixation in Yamane technique between 03/2019 - 04/2024 were included. Prediction errors for EVO 2.0, BUII, SRK/T, and Hoffer Q formulas were calculated by subtracting the actual spherical equivalent from the predicted spherical equivalent. The performance of each method was evaluated by Eyetemis, an online tool for analyzing prediction errors. The tool includes robust t-tests to compare the trimmed means of the data. RESULTS: 59 eyes met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. All formulas showed myopic mean refractive prediction errors. With regard to spherical equivalent prediction error (SEQ-PE), precision of the SEQ-PE and absolute SEQ-PE, there were no significant differences between the formulas examined. The EVO 2.0 formula showed the lowest trimmed mean error with 0.62±0.58 D followed by BUII with 0.66±0.71 D. Within ± 0.50 D the EVO 2.0 formula achieved the highest accuracy with 54% whereas BUII and Hoffer Q achieved the highest accuracy within ±0.25 D with 28%. CONCLUSION: The EVO 2.0 formula represents a viable option for IOL calculation in patients undergoing scleral fixation with the Yamane technique. Although none of the formulas showed significant differences in performance, all consistently resulted in a myopic prediction error in the analyzed cohort. Therefore, when using the Yamane technique, targeting a slightly hyperopic refraction may help compensate for this myopic shift in similar patient populations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Ophthalmology
Published
2026-05-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-026-04934-2
Primary Topic
Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) formula in secondary scleral fixation using the Yamane technique: a retrospective comparison of intraocular lens power calculation formulas

Teresa Rauchegger, Claus Zehetner, Martha Nowosielski, Reinhard Angermann et al.
BMC Ophthalmology
Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
article

Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) formula in secondary scleral fixation using the Yamane technique: a retrospective comparison of intraocular lens power calculation formulas

Teresa Rauchegger, Claus Zehetner, Martha Nowosielski, Reinhard Angermann, Matúš Rehák, Yvonne Nowosielski, Roman Lischke, Andreas Dimmer, Barbara Teuchner, Christoph Palme, Eduard Schmid
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) 2.0 with Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff/Theoretical (SRK/T), Hoffer Q and Barrett Universal II (BUII) intraocular lens power calculation formulas in eyes that have undergone scleral fixation in Yamane technique. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this retrospective study, patients undergoing secondary intraocular lens fixation in Yamane technique between 03/2019 - 04/2024 were included. Prediction errors for EVO 2.0, BUII, SRK/T, and Hoffer Q formulas were calculated by subtracting the actual spherical equivalent from the predicted spherical equivalent. The performance of each method was evaluated by Eyetemis, an online tool for analyzing prediction errors. The tool includes robust t-tests to compare the trimmed means of the data. RESULTS: 59 eyes met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. All formulas showed myopic mean refractive prediction errors. With regard to spherical equivalent prediction error (SEQ-PE), precision of the SEQ-PE and absolute SEQ-PE, there were no significant differences between the formulas examined. The EVO 2.0 formula showed the lowest trimmed mean error with 0.62±0.58 D followed by BUII with 0.66±0.71 D. Within ± 0.50 D the EVO 2.0 formula achieved the highest accuracy with 54% whereas BUII and Hoffer Q achieved the highest accuracy within ±0.25 D with 28%. CONCLUSION: The EVO 2.0 formula represents a viable option for IOL calculation in patients undergoing scleral fixation with the Yamane technique. Although none of the formulas showed significant differences in performance, all consistently resulted in a myopic prediction error in the analyzed cohort. Therefore, when using the Yamane technique, targeting a slightly hyperopic refraction may help compensate for this myopic shift in similar patient populations.

BMC Ophthalmology
Innsbruck Medical University (AT), Stadtkrankenhaus Schwabach (DE)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.