Literature DB >> 31249905

Intraocular lens power calculation after radial keratotomy and LASIK - A case report.

Chun-Fu Liu1,2,3, Chi-Chin Sun1,2, Yun-Hsuan Lin1,2, Shu-Yen Peng1,2, Ling Yeung1,2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To report a challenging intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation case who received both radial keratotomy (RK) and laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). OBSERVATIONS: A 51-year-old man had received refractive surgery with RK and later enhanced by LASIK more than 20 years ago. He developed severe cataract in left eye with best-corrected visual acuity of 20/100. The IOL power calculation was made using several methods available at the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) online calculator, including IOL calculation formulas for post-LASIK condition (Shammas, Haigis-L, Barrett True K no history, and Potvin-Hill Pentacam) and formulas for post-RK condition (Double K-modified Holladay 1 based on Oculus Pentacam and IOL Master, and Barrett True K). Haigis-L, Shammas and Barrett true K no history were found to be most accurate in predicting IOL power.
CONCLUSIONS: Haigis-L, Shammas and Barrett true K no history are reliable formulas for IOL power calculation in patients who received both RK and LASIK.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cataract; Intraocular lens power; LASIK; Radial keratotomy; Refractive surgery

Year:  2019        PMID: 31249905      PMCID: PMC6584476          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajoc.2019.100495

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep        ISSN: 2451-9936


Introduction

The challenge of calculating the appropriate intraocular lens (IOL) power after previous refractive surgery such as radial keratotomy (RK) or laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) remained unresolved for the past two decades.1, 2, 3 The American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) offers an online calculator (http://iolcalc.org/) with 13 IOL power calculation methods for patients with prior myopic LASIK or RK. Using as much available information as possible from a given eye, the calculator displays results for all formulas for which sufficient data have been provided as well as the average, minimum, and maximum IOL powers determined by the relevant methods., As far as we know, there is still no study on how to calculate the IOL power in patients receiving both RK and myopic LASIK. Herein, we report our experience for IOL calculation in a rare case who received double refractive surgery with RK and myopic LASIK. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan (Reference No. 104–9208B) in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent to participate in the study was obtained from the patient.

Case report

A 51-year-old man presented to our clinic due to progressively decreased vision in his left eye (OS). The uncorrected visual acuity was 20/40 in the right eye (OD) and 20/600 in the left eye. The cycloplegic refraction was OD -1.00 -1.25 × 60 and OS -7.00 -1.25 × 103. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were 20/20 with OD -0.50 -0.75 × 70 correction and 20/100 with OS -6.50 -1.00 × 100 correction. His medical history revealed that he had received bilateral RK at age 28, followed by bilateral enhanced procedure with LASIK at age 40 due to myopia regression to around −4 diopter (D) in both eyes. His left eye also received a scleral buckle surgery for retinal detachment 15 months before visiting us. Then he received a trans pars plana vitrectomy (TPPV) for macular pucker 1 year ago. His post-operation condition was stable. All the above surgeries were done in other hospitals and the pre-operative refractive data could not be obtained. In ocular examination, the anterior segments were essentially normal except sixteen cut radial keratotomy wounds in both eyes and severe cataract in the left eye (Fig. 1A). The optical zone of the cornea in the left eye was 3.1 mm horizontally and 2.4 mm vertically. Fundus exam found well-attached retina and pinkish optic disc in both eyes. Decreased foveal reflex and a small extrafoveal pigmented scar were found in the left eye (Fig. 2A). Mild change of foveal contour was seen on the optical coherence tomography (OCT) (OCT III, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany) (Fig. 2B). Left-eye cataract surgery was suggested after thoughtful discussion with the patient. His keratometry and biometry data were collected by both IOLMaster (IOLMaster 500, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany) and Pentacam (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) (Fig. 2C). All available information was input to the ASCRS website and seven formulas were used for IOL calculation. His average post-RK corneal power was calculated to be 4 mm and post-LASIK true net power was also calculated with Pentacam as suggested by the ASCRS website.
Fig. 1

(A) Pre-operative and (B) post-operative anterior segment photographs of the left eye.

Fig. 2

(A) Color fundus photograph, (B) optical coherence tomography, and (C) Pentacam power distribution mode of the left eye. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article)

(A) Pre-operative and (B) post-operative anterior segment photographs of the left eye. (A) Color fundus photograph, (B) optical coherence tomography, and (C) Pentacam power distribution mode of the left eye. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article) Phacoemusification and IOL implantation were smoothly performed. An AAB00 23.0D IOL (Abbott Medical Optics, Abbott Laboratories Inc. Abbott Park, Illinois, USA) was implanted in this patient. We chose the IOL power according to Haigis-L formula on ASCRS IOL calculator with the target refraction power set as −1.0D. At post-operative 1.5 months, the cycloplegic refraction was −0.50 -1.00 × 50, the BCVA improved to 20/50, and the spherical equivalence was −1.0 D. Then, IOL power was recalculated using the methods provided at the ASCRS website with the post-operative target refraction set at −1.0D to achieve estimated −1.0D target power. The IOL powers obtained using the same seven formulas as before were compared with the actual IOL power used (i.e., 23.0D). The differences are shown in Table 1. As can be seen, Haigis-L, Shammas and Barrett true K no history were the most accurate formulas for calculating IOL power.
Table 1

Intraocular lens power calculated using formulas from ASCRS online calculator.

ConditionFormulaK measured byIOL suggestion at target refraction −1.0DDifference from the actual IOL power used (i.e., 23.0D)
Post myopic LASIKShammasIOL master23.50+0.50
Haigis-LIOL master22.96−0.04
Barrett True K No HistoryIOL master22.58−0.42
Potvin-Hill PentacamPentacam21.71−1.29
Post RKDouble K-modified Holladay 1 based on Oculus Pentacam1Pentacam21.00−2.00
Double K modified Holladay 1 based on IOL Master/LenstarIOL master21.48−1.52
Barrett True KIOL master21.28−1.72

Post-myopic LASIK parameters: IOL master cornea measurement: K1 = 35.83D, K2 = 36.33D, Axial length: 27.37mm, A constant of AAB00 on IOL master (SRK/T): 119, ACD by IOL master: 3.0mm, TNP_Apex_Zone40 value from the Pentacam: 34.75D.

Post-RK parameters: IOL master cornea measurement: K1 = 35.83D, K2 = 36.33D, Axial length: 27.37mm, A constant of AAB00 on IOL master (SRK/T): 119, ACD by IOL master: 3.0mm, Pentacam PWR_SF_Pupil_4.0mm Zone: 36.5D, CT_MIN: 544.

Intraocular lens power calculated using formulas from ASCRS online calculator. Post-myopic LASIK parameters: IOL master cornea measurement: K1 = 35.83D, K2 = 36.33D, Axial length: 27.37mm, A constant of AAB00 on IOL master (SRK/T): 119, ACD by IOL master: 3.0mm, TNP_Apex_Zone40 value from the Pentacam: 34.75D. Post-RK parameters: IOL master cornea measurement: K1 = 35.83D, K2 = 36.33D, Axial length: 27.37mm, A constant of AAB00 on IOL master (SRK/T): 119, ACD by IOL master: 3.0mm, Pentacam PWR_SF_Pupil_4.0mm Zone: 36.5D, CT_MIN: 544.

Discussion

As mentioned above, Haigis-L, Shammas and Barrett true K no history were the most accurate IOL power calculation formulas for an eye with prior surgeries of both RK and myopic LASIK. There would be a significant refractive error if the formulas for eyes with prior RK were used in this case (Table 1). Furthermore, the recently published Pentacam-based true net power application for post-LASIK calculation seems unsuitable for patient having undergone both RK and LAISK surgeries. According to this case report, we hypothesized that IOL calculation with Haigis-L formula using these data seems to yield accurate IOL power. In other words, using post-LASIK condition alone for IOL power calculation with Haigis-L formula may be sufficient and the post-RK condition may need not be considered.6, 7, 8 As the LASIK-enhanced RK procedure (both residual hyperopia and myopia) became more popular,, the present case provides an important clinical experience for IOL power calculation of patients with history of both RK and LASIK surgeries. There were several limitations of the study. Firstly, this is only a case report, further large-scale prospective study on these cases is necessary to figure out a better method for IOL power calculation in these patients. Secondly, the patient had received scleral buckle and TPPV for retinal detachment and macular pucker; these two procedures might affect anterior chamber depth, axial length and corneal curvature. However, previous reported indicated eye condition may be stable for IOL power calculation at 3 months after sclera buckle surgery, but there was still no reference data regarding to IOL power calculation in patient who received both scleral buckle and TPPV. The biometry data might be reliable in this patient because the cataract surgery was performed at 23 and 20 months after scleral buckle and TPPV, respectively (Table 2). However, our result needs confirmation by a large-scale study in the future.
Table 2

Surgical history timeline.

1993Received RK surgery both eyes.
2005Enhanced by LAISK both eyes.
2013/12Scleral buckle due to retinal detachment in the left eye.
2014/03Trans pars plana vitrectomy for macular pucker in the left eye.
2015/11Cataract surgery in the left eye.
Surgical history timeline.

Patient consent

The written consent was obtained from the patient.

Funding

No funding or grant support

Conflicts of interest

The following authors have no financial disclosures: (CFL, CCS, YHL, SYP, LY).

Authorship

All authors attest that they meet the current ICMJE criteria for Authorship.
  11 in total

1.  Analysis of intraocular lens power calculation in post-radial keratotomy eyes.

Authors:  Lin Chen; Mark J Mannis; James J Salz; Francisco J Garcia-Ferrer; Jayne Ge
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.351

2.  Femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis for consecutive hyperopia after radial keratotomy.

Authors:  Antonio Leccisotti; Stefania V Fields
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 3.351

3.  One-Year Outcomes of Femtosecond Laser-Assisted LASIK Following Previous Radial Keratotomy.

Authors:  Sloan W Rush; Ryan B Rush
Journal:  J Refract Surg       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  New algorithm for intraocular lens power calculations after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis based on rotating Scheimpflug camera data.

Authors:  Richard Potvin; Warren Hill
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.351

5.  Intraocular lens power calculation after radial keratotomy: estimating the refractive corneal power.

Authors:  Shady T Awwad; Surendar Dwarakanathan; R Wayne Bowman; H Dwight Cavanagh; Steven M Verity; Vinod V Mootha; James P McCulley
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.351

6.  Refractive complications of cataract surgery after radial keratotomy.

Authors:  D D Koch; J F Liu; L L Hyde; R L Rock; J M Emery
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  1989-12-15       Impact factor: 5.258

7.  New algorithm for post-radial keratotomy intraocular lens power calculations based on rotating Scheimpflug camera data.

Authors:  Richard Potvin; Warren Hill
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 3.351

8.  A Prospective Study of Biometric Stability After Scleral Buckling Surgery.

Authors:  Chee Wai Wong; Marcus Ang; Andrew Tsai; Val Phua; Shu Yen Lee
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 5.258

9.  Evaluation of intraocular lens power prediction methods using the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons Post-Keratorefractive Intraocular Lens Power Calculator.

Authors:  Li Wang; Warren E Hill; Douglas D Koch
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.351

10.  Comparison of intraocular lens power calculation methods after myopic laser refractive surgery without previous refractive surgery data.

Authors:  Ruibo Yang; Annie Yeh; Michael R George; Maria Rahman; Helen Boerman; Ming Wang
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2013-07-13       Impact factor: 3.351

View more
  3 in total

1.  Intraocular lens power calculation after radical keratotomy and photorefractive keratectomy: A case report.

Authors:  Tianxu Xiong; Jiancheng Mu; Hao Chen; Wei Fan
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-07-08       Impact factor: 1.817

2.  Comparative analysis of predictability and accuracy of American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery online calculator with Haigis-L formula in post-myopic laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis refractive surgery eyes.

Authors:  P Ramya Menon; Madhu Shekhar; R Sankarananthan; Neha Agarwal; C A Dhanya; Hiruni K Wijesinghe
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 1.848

3.  Intraocular lens power calculation after two different successive corneal refractive surgeries.

Authors:  Zongsheng Zeng; Xiangyu Ye; Qingzhong Chen; Changkai Jia; Guangbin Zhang
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep       Date:  2022-04-26
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.