TY - JOUR
T1 - Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Formulas in Eyes With Keratoconus
AU - Wang, Kendrick M.
AU - Jun, Albert S.
AU - Ladas, John G.
AU - Siddiqui, Aazim A.
AU - Woreta, Fasika
AU - Srikumaran, Divya
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding/Support: This study received financial support from the Sandra and Larry Small Fund and also support for statistical analysis from the National Center for Research Resources , United States and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), United States of the National Institutes of Health , United States through Grant Number 1UL1TR001079 .
Funding Information:
Funding/Support: This study received financial support from the Sandra and Larry Small Fund and also support for statistical analysis from the National Center for Research Resources, United States and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), United States of the National Institutes of Health, United States through Grant Number 1UL1TR001079. Financial Disclosures: Divya Srikumaran is a consultant for Alcon Laboratories, Inc. John Ladas is a president at Advanced Euclidean Solutions. The other authors indicate no financial support or conflicts of interest. All authors attest that they meet the current ICMJE criteria for authorship.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2020/4
Y1 - 2020/4
N2 - Purpose: To evaluate the refractive accuracy of current intraocular lens (IOL) formulas in eyes with keratoconus. Design: Retrospective case series. Methods: Preoperative optical biometry, Pentacam topography, and postoperative outcomes were collected from eyes with keratoconus that had uncomplicated cataract surgery between 2014 and 2018 at a single institution. Exclusion criteria include postoperative best-corrected spectacle visual acuity worse than 20/40, multifocal lens, prior ophthalmic surgeries, and prior ocular trauma. The Hoffer Q, SRK/T, Holladay I, Holladay II, Haigis, and Barrett Universal II formulas were analyzed in each eye stratified by keratoconus severity. Results: A total of 73 eyes were included. All formulas had a positive mean predicted error ranging from 0.10 to 4.38 diopters (D). The Barrett Universal II formula had the lowest median absolute error for stage I (n = 46, 0.445 D) and II (n = 22, 0.445 D) eyes, and the highest percentage of eyes with predicted error within ±0.50 D for both stage I (52%) and II (50%) eyes. In stage III eyes (n = 5), the Haigis formula had the lowest median predicated error (1.90 D) and the highest percentage of eyes with predicted error within ±0.50 D (40%). Corneal power measured by optical biometers was higher than measurements by Pentacam keratometry. Conclusions: All formulas tend to have a hyperopic surprise. The Barrett Universal II formula was the most accurate for mild to moderate disease. Pentacam keratometry may help avoid hyperopic outcomes.
AB - Purpose: To evaluate the refractive accuracy of current intraocular lens (IOL) formulas in eyes with keratoconus. Design: Retrospective case series. Methods: Preoperative optical biometry, Pentacam topography, and postoperative outcomes were collected from eyes with keratoconus that had uncomplicated cataract surgery between 2014 and 2018 at a single institution. Exclusion criteria include postoperative best-corrected spectacle visual acuity worse than 20/40, multifocal lens, prior ophthalmic surgeries, and prior ocular trauma. The Hoffer Q, SRK/T, Holladay I, Holladay II, Haigis, and Barrett Universal II formulas were analyzed in each eye stratified by keratoconus severity. Results: A total of 73 eyes were included. All formulas had a positive mean predicted error ranging from 0.10 to 4.38 diopters (D). The Barrett Universal II formula had the lowest median absolute error for stage I (n = 46, 0.445 D) and II (n = 22, 0.445 D) eyes, and the highest percentage of eyes with predicted error within ±0.50 D for both stage I (52%) and II (50%) eyes. In stage III eyes (n = 5), the Haigis formula had the lowest median predicated error (1.90 D) and the highest percentage of eyes with predicted error within ±0.50 D (40%). Corneal power measured by optical biometers was higher than measurements by Pentacam keratometry. Conclusions: All formulas tend to have a hyperopic surprise. The Barrett Universal II formula was the most accurate for mild to moderate disease. Pentacam keratometry may help avoid hyperopic outcomes.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85078469921&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85078469921&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ajo.2019.11.019
DO - 10.1016/j.ajo.2019.11.019
M3 - Article
C2 - 31770511
AN - SCOPUS:85078469921
SN - 0002-9394
VL - 212
SP - 26
EP - 33
JO - American Journal of Ophthalmology
JF - American Journal of Ophthalmology
ER -