Sabite Emine Gökce1, Ildamaris Montes De Oca1, David L Cooke1, Li Wang1, Douglas D Koch1, Zaina Al-Mohtaseb2. 1. From the Cullen Eye Institute (Gökce, Montes De Oca, Wang, Koch, Al-Mohtaseb), Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, and the Great Lakes Eye Care (Cooke), Saint Joseph and the Department of Neurology and Ophthalmology (Cooke), Michigan State University, College of Osteopathic Medicine, East Lansing, Michigan, USA; the Department of Ophthalmology, Dünya Göz Hospital (Gökce), Ankara, Turkey. 2. From the Cullen Eye Institute (Gökce, Montes De Oca, Wang, Koch, Al-Mohtaseb), Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, and the Great Lakes Eye Care (Cooke), Saint Joseph and the Department of Neurology and Ophthalmology (Cooke), Michigan State University, College of Osteopathic Medicine, East Lansing, Michigan, USA; the Department of Ophthalmology, Dünya Göz Hospital (Gökce), Ankara, Turkey. Electronic address: zaina1225@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the effect of anterior chamber depth (ACD) on the accuracy of 8 intraocular lens calculation formulas in patients with normal axial lengths (ALs). SETTING: Baylor College of Medicine, Alkek Eye center, Houston, Texas, USA. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: Patients having cataract surgery with ALs between 22.0 mm and 25.0 mm were divided into 3 groups based on their preoperative ACD measurement. The mean prediction errors, mean absolute errors (MAEs), and median absolute errors for each group were calculated. RESULTS: For the ACD of 3.0 mm or less group and the ACD of 3.5 mm or more group, the Barrett Universal II, Holladay 2, Haigis, and Olsen ray-tracing formulas had mean prediction error values that were not significantly different from zero. For the ACD of 3.01 to 3.49 mm group, all formulas had mean prediction error values that were not significantly different from zero. For the ACD of 3.0 mm or less group, the Barrett Universal II formula had a smaller median absolute error than the Haigis, Hoffer Q, and Olsen optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR) (Lenstar) formulas and a smaller MAE than the Hoffer Q, Hill-RBF, and Olsen OLCR (P < .05). In the ACD of 3.5 mm or more group, the Barrett MAE was smaller than the Hoffer Q (P < .05); however, there were no significant differences between median absolute errors. CONCLUSION: In eyes with normal ALs, taking preoperative ACD values into consideration might improve refractive outcomes.
PURPOSE: To determine the effect of anterior chamber depth (ACD) on the accuracy of 8 intraocular lens calculation formulas in patients with normal axial lengths (ALs). SETTING: Baylor College of Medicine, Alkek Eye center, Houston, Texas, USA. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS:Patients having cataract surgery with ALs between 22.0 mm and 25.0 mm were divided into 3 groups based on their preoperative ACD measurement. The mean prediction errors, mean absolute errors (MAEs), and median absolute errors for each group were calculated. RESULTS: For the ACD of 3.0 mm or less group and the ACD of 3.5 mm or more group, the Barrett Universal II, Holladay 2, Haigis, and Olsen ray-tracing formulas had mean prediction error values that were not significantly different from zero. For the ACD of 3.01 to 3.49 mm group, all formulas had mean prediction error values that were not significantly different from zero. For the ACD of 3.0 mm or less group, the Barrett Universal II formula had a smaller median absolute error than the Haigis, Hoffer Q, and Olsen optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR) (Lenstar) formulas and a smaller MAE than the Hoffer Q, Hill-RBF, and Olsen OLCR (P < .05). In the ACD of 3.5 mm or more group, the Barrett MAE was smaller than the Hoffer Q (P < .05); however, there were no significant differences between median absolute errors. CONCLUSION: In eyes with normal ALs, taking preoperative ACD values into consideration might improve refractive outcomes.
Authors: Joaquín Fernández; Manuel Rodríguez-Vallejo; Javier Martínez; Noemi Burguera; David Piñero Journal: Int Ophthalmol Date: 2022-02-08 Impact factor: 2.029
Authors: Joaquín Fernández; Manuel Rodríguez-Vallejo; Javier Martínez; Ana Tauste; David P Piñero Journal: J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-05-14 Impact factor: 1.909