Intraocular Lens Power Formulas, Biometry, and Intraoperative Aberrometry A Review

被引:65
|
作者
Kane, Jack X.
Chang, David F.
机构
[1] Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne
[2] University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
关键词
PARTIAL-COHERENCE INTERFEROMETRY; ANTERIOR-CHAMBER DEPTH; 2 OPTICAL BIOMETERS; AXIAL LENGTH MEASUREMENT; WAVE-FRONT ABERROMETRY; SWEPT-SOURCE OCT; CATARACT-SURGERY; PREOPERATIVE BIOMETRY; HOFFER-Q; TOMOGRAPHY BIOMETER;
D O I
10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.08.010
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
The refractive outcome of cataract surgery is influenced by the choice of intraocular lens (IOL) power formula and the accuracy of the various devices used to measure the eye (including intraoperative aberrometry [IA]). This review aimed to cover the breadth of literature over the previous 10 years, focusing on 3 main questions: (1) What IOL power formulas currently are available and which is the most accurate? (2) What biometry devices are available, do the measurements they obtain differ from one another, and will this cause a clinically significant change in IOL power selection? and (3) Does IA improve refractive outcomes? A literature review was performed by searching the PubMed database for articles on each of these topics that identified 1313 articles, of which 166 were included in the review. For IOL power formulas, the Kane formula was the most accurate formula over the entire axial length (AL) spectrum and in both the short eye (AL, <= 22.0 mm) and long eye (AL, >= 26.0 mm) subgroups. Other formulas that performedwell in the short-eye subgroup were the Olsen (4-factor), Haigis, and Hill-radial basis function (RBF) 1.0. In the long-eye group, the other formulas that performed well included the Barrett Universal II (BUII), Olsen (4-factor), or Holladay 1 with Wang-Koch adjustment. All biometry devices delivered highly reproducible measurements, and most comparative studies showed little difference in the average measures for all the biometric variables between devices. The differences seen resulted in minimal clinically significant effects on IOL power selection. The main difference found between devices was the ability to measure successfully through dense cataracts, with swept-source OCT-based machines performing better than partial coherence interferometry and optical low-coherence reflectometry devices. Intraoperative aberrometry generally improved outcomes for spherical and toric IOLs in eyes both with and without prior refractive surgery when the BUII and Hill-RBF, Barrett toric calculator, or Barrett True-K formulas were not used. When they were used, IA did not result in better outcomes. (C) 2020 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology
引用
收藏
页码:E94 / E114
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Intraoperative aberrometry vs modern preoperative formulas in predicting intraocular lens power
    Raufi, Nikolas
    James, Charlene
    Kuo, Anthony
    Vann, Robin
    JOURNAL OF CATARACT AND REFRACTIVE SURGERY, 2020, 46 (06): : 857 - 861
  • [2] Intraoperative aberrometry versus preoperative biometry for intraocular lens power selection in axial myopia
    Hill, Darren C.
    Sudhakar, Shruti
    Hill, Christopher S.
    King, Tonya S.
    Scott, Ingrid U.
    Ernst, Brett B.
    Pantanelli, Seth M.
    JOURNAL OF CATARACT AND REFRACTIVE SURGERY, 2017, 43 (04): : 505 - 510
  • [3] Intraoperative aberrometry versus preoperative biometry for intraocular lens power selection in short eyes
    Sudhakar, Shruti
    Hill, Darren C.
    King, Tonya S.
    Scott, Ingrid U.
    Mishra, Gautam
    Ernst, Brett B.
    Pantanelli, Seth M.
    JOURNAL OF CATARACT AND REFRACTIVE SURGERY, 2019, 45 (06): : 719 - 724
  • [4] Prediction accuracy of intraoperative aberrometry compared with preoperative biometry formulae for intraocular lens power selection
    Ma, Jingyi
    El-Defrawy, Sherif
    Lloyd, John
    Rai, Amandeep
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY-JOURNAL CANADIEN D OPHTALMOLOGIE, 2023, 58 (01): : 2 - 10
  • [5] Intraoperative aberrometry versus preoperative biometry for intraocular lens power selection in patients with axial hyperopia
    Bansal, Muskaan
    Thakur, Anchal
    Gupta, Gaurav
    Jurangal, Ajay
    Khanna, Rahul
    Malhotra, Chintan
    Gupta, Amit
    Jain, Arun Kumar
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2022, 70 (12) : 4295 - 4299
  • [6] Refractive outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens power calculation
    Zhang, Zina
    Thomas, Logan William
    Leu, Szu-Yen
    Carter, Steven
    Garg, Sumit
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2017, 65 (09) : 813 - 817
  • [7] Intraoperative Aberrometry and Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Reply
    Hatch, Kathryn M.
    Woodcock, Emily
    Talamo, Jonathan H.
    JOURNAL OF REFRACTIVE SURGERY, 2016, 32 (02) : 138 - +
  • [8] Intraocular Lens Power Selection and Positioning With and Without Intraoperative Aberrometry
    Hatch, Kathryn M.
    Woodcock, Emily C.
    Talamo, Jonathan H.
    JOURNAL OF REFRACTIVE SURGERY, 2015, 31 (04) : 237 - 243
  • [9] The end of preoperative biometry? Calculating intraocular lens power 'on the table' with two new intraoperative Hartmann-Shack aberrometry derived formulae
    Huelle, Jan O.
    Druchkiv, Vasyl
    Habib, Nabil
    Richard, Gisbert
    Katz, Toam
    Linke, Stephan
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2016, 57 (12)
  • [10] Comparison of Preoperative Intraocular Lens Power Selection Methods to Intraoperative Aberrometry in Short Eyes
    Sudhakar, Shruti
    Hill, Darren
    Hill, Christopher
    Scott, Ingrid U.
    Ernst, Brett
    Pantanelli, Seth
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2016, 57 (12)