Giacomo Savini1, Piero Barboni2, Pietro Ducoli2, Enrico Borrelli2, Kenneth J Hoffer2. 1. From the Studio Oculistico d'Azeglio (Savini, Barboni), Bologna, G.B. Bietti Foundation-IRCCS (Ducoli), Rome, and Scientific Institute San Raffaele (Barboni, Borrelli), Milan, Italy; the School of Optometry and Ophthalmology and Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Key Laboratory of Vision Science, Ministry of Health P.R. China, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China (Savini); the Jules Stein Eye Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, and St. Mary's Eye Center (Hoffer), Santa Monica, California, USA. Electronic address: giacomo.savini@alice.it. 2. From the Studio Oculistico d'Azeglio (Savini, Barboni), Bologna, G.B. Bietti Foundation-IRCCS (Ducoli), Rome, and Scientific Institute San Raffaele (Barboni, Borrelli), Milan, Italy; the School of Optometry and Ophthalmology and Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Key Laboratory of Vision Science, Ministry of Health P.R. China, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China (Savini); the Jules Stein Eye Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, and St. Mary's Eye Center (Hoffer), Santa Monica, California, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the influence of intraocular (IOL) haptic design on the refraction prediction error in patients having cataract surgery. SETTING: Private practice. DESIGN: Comparative case series. METHODS: Corneal power and axial length were measured with the same devices in eyes with a 3-piece Acrysof IOL and eyes with a 1-piece Acrysof IOL and were entered into the Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T formulas. The median absolute error and mean absolute error in refraction prediction (ie, difference between expected refraction and actual refraction) were assessed 1 month postoperatively. RESULTS: The study evaluated 110 eyes with the 3-piece IOL and 84 eyes with the 1-piece IOL. With all formulas, the median absolute error was lower with the 3-piece IOL. It ranged between 0.15 diopter (D) (Haigis and Holladay 1) and 0.19 D (SRK/T) with the 3-piece IOL and between 0.23 D (Haigis) and 0.30 D (SRK/T) with the 1-piece IOL. With all formulas, a higher percentage of eyes with the 3-piece IOL were within ±0.25 D and ±0.50 D of the target refraction. CONCLUSIONS: Three-piece IOLs may yield better refractive outcomes than 1-piece IOLs. A possible reason is that once the early forward IOL shift previously observed with the 3-piece design occurs because of the haptic-compression force decay typical of these IOLs, the rigid haptics of 3-piece IOLs still exert more pressure against the capsular bag than the haptics of 1-piece IOLs. Therefore, 3-piece IOLs may better resist subsequent capsule contraction and provide a more predictable effective lens position. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Dr. Hoffer receives royalties for his book IOL Power, Slack, Inc., and formula royalties from all manufacturers using the Hoffer Q formula. No other author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
PURPOSE: To assess the influence of intraocular (IOL) haptic design on the refraction prediction error in patients having cataract surgery. SETTING: Private practice. DESIGN: Comparative case series. METHODS: Corneal power and axial length were measured with the same devices in eyes with a 3-piece Acrysof IOL and eyes with a 1-piece Acrysof IOL and were entered into the Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T formulas. The median absolute error and mean absolute error in refraction prediction (ie, difference between expected refraction and actual refraction) were assessed 1 month postoperatively. RESULTS: The study evaluated 110 eyes with the 3-piece IOL and 84 eyes with the 1-piece IOL. With all formulas, the median absolute error was lower with the 3-piece IOL. It ranged between 0.15 diopter (D) (Haigis and Holladay 1) and 0.19 D (SRK/T) with the 3-piece IOL and between 0.23 D (Haigis) and 0.30 D (SRK/T) with the 1-piece IOL. With all formulas, a higher percentage of eyes with the 3-piece IOL were within ±0.25 D and ±0.50 D of the target refraction. CONCLUSIONS: Three-piece IOLs may yield better refractive outcomes than 1-piece IOLs. A possible reason is that once the early forward IOL shift previously observed with the 3-piece design occurs because of the haptic-compression force decay typical of these IOLs, the rigid haptics of 3-piece IOLs still exert more pressure against the capsular bag than the haptics of 1-piece IOLs. Therefore, 3-piece IOLs may better resist subsequent capsule contraction and provide a more predictable effective lens position. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Dr. Hoffer receives royalties for his book IOL Power, Slack, Inc., and formula royalties from all manufacturers using the Hoffer Q formula. No other author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.