Yu Luo1,2, Hongyu Li1,2, Lixiong Gao1, Jinlin Du1,2, Wenqian Chen2, Yi Gao2, Zi Ye3, Zhaohui Li4,5. 1. Medical School of Chinese People's Liberation Army, No. 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, No. 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, No. 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China. yeziclover@163.com. 4. Medical School of Chinese People's Liberation Army, No. 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China. zhaohuili202104@163.com. 5. Department of Ophthalmology, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, No. 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China. zhaohuili202104@163.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Calculating the intraocular lens (IOL) power in short eyes for cataract surgery has been a challenge. A meta-analysis was conducted to identify, among several classic and new IOL power calculation formulae, which obtains the best accuracy. METHODS: All studies aiming at comparing the accuracy of IOL power calculation formulae in short eyes were searched up in the databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane library from Jan. 2011 to Mar. 2021. Primary outcomes were the percentages of eyes with a refractive prediction error in ± 0.25D, ± 0.5D and ± 1.0D. RESULTS: Totally 1,476 eyes from 14 studies were enrolled in comparison of 13 formulae (Barrett Universal II, Castrop, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay1, Holladay2, Kane, Ladas Super Formula, Okulix, Olsen, Pearl-DGS, SRK/T and T2). Pearl-DGS had the highest percentage within ± 0.25D. In the ± 0.5D range, Pearl-DGS obtained the highest percentage again, and it was significantly higher than Barrett Universal II, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay1, Holladay2 and Olsen (P = 0.001, P = 0.02, P = 0.0003, P = 0.01, P = 0.007, P = 0.05, respectively). In the ± 1.0D range, Okulix possessed the highest percentage, and it was significantly higher than Barrett Universal II, Castrop, Hoffer Q and Holladay2 (P = 0.0005, P = 0.03, P = 0.003, P = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSION: The new generation formulae, based on artificial intelligence or ray-tracing principle, are more accurate than the convergence formulae. Pearl-DGS and Okulix are the two most accurate formulae in short eyes.
PURPOSE: Calculating the intraocular lens (IOL) power in short eyes for cataract surgery has been a challenge. A meta-analysis was conducted to identify, among several classic and new IOL power calculation formulae, which obtains the best accuracy. METHODS: All studies aiming at comparing the accuracy of IOL power calculation formulae in short eyes were searched up in the databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane library from Jan. 2011 to Mar. 2021. Primary outcomes were the percentages of eyes with a refractive prediction error in ± 0.25D, ± 0.5D and ± 1.0D. RESULTS: Totally 1,476 eyes from 14 studies were enrolled in comparison of 13 formulae (Barrett Universal II, Castrop, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay1, Holladay2, Kane, Ladas Super Formula, Okulix, Olsen, Pearl-DGS, SRK/T and T2). Pearl-DGS had the highest percentage within ± 0.25D. In the ± 0.5D range, Pearl-DGS obtained the highest percentage again, and it was significantly higher than Barrett Universal II, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay1, Holladay2 and Olsen (P = 0.001, P = 0.02, P = 0.0003, P = 0.01, P = 0.007, P = 0.05, respectively). In the ± 1.0D range, Okulix possessed the highest percentage, and it was significantly higher than Barrett Universal II, Castrop, Hoffer Q and Holladay2 (P = 0.0005, P = 0.03, P = 0.003, P = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSION: The new generation formulae, based on artificial intelligence or ray-tracing principle, are more accurate than the convergence formulae. Pearl-DGS and Okulix are the two most accurate formulae in short eyes.
Authors: Shruti Sudhakar; Darren C Hill; Tonya S King; Ingrid U Scott; Gautam Mishra; Brett B Ernst; Seth M Pantanelli Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg Date: 2019-03-08 Impact factor: 3.351
Authors: Niels E de Vries; Carroll A B Webers; Wouter R H Touwslager; Noel J C Bauer; John de Brabander; Tos T Berendschot; Rudy M M A Nuijts Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg Date: 2011-03-11 Impact factor: 3.351
Authors: Andrew Bastawrous; Wanjiku Mathenge; John Nkurikiye; Kevin Wing; Hillary Rono; Michael Gichangi; Helen A Weiss; David Macleod; Allen Foster; Matthew Burton; Hannah Kuper Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2019-06-05