Improving Accuracy of In-The-Bag Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Adult Eyes with Unilateral Subluxated Lenses by Using the Anterior Chamber Depth of the Unaffected Eye

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to determine the interchangeability of bilateral anterior chamber depth (ACD) in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations for cataractous eyes and refractive outcomes using the unaffected fellow eye's ACD in subluxated crystalline lenses.

METHODS

The predicted postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) calculated using the Kane formula with and without fellow eye's ACD in 202 cataract patients was compared. Refractive outcomes of the newer formulas (the Kane, Barrett Universal II [BUII], and Pearl-DGS formulas) with affected eye's ACD and with unaffected fellow eye's ACD were compared in 33 eyes with lens subluxation (the affected eye) undergoing in-the-bag IOL implantation. The SD of the prediction error (PE) was assessed using the heteroscedastic method.

RESULTS

In 202 paired cataractous eyes, no marked ACD difference was found bilaterally; the predicted SE obtained without the fellow eye's ACD was comparable with that calculated with the fellow eye one (p = 0.90), with a mean absolute difference of 0.03 ± 0.03 D. With the affected eye AL, keratometry, and ACD, the median absolute error (MedAE) was 0.38-0.64 D, and the percentage of PE within ±0.50 D was 30.30-57.58%. The unaffected eye's ACD improved the results (MedAE, 0.35-0.49 D; the percentage of PE within ±0.50 D, 54.55-63.64%). The SDs of the BUII (0.82 D) and Pearl-DGS formulas (0.87 D) with the affected eye's ACD were significantly larger than those of the Kane and Pearl-DGS formulas (both 0.69 D) with the unaffected eye's ACD.

CONCLUSION

Bilateral ACD was interchangeable in IOL power calculation for cataractous eyes when using the Kane formula. Unaffected eye's ACD in lieu of affected eye's ACD can enhance the accuracy of newer formulas in patients with unilateral subluxated lenses undergoing in-the-bag IOL implantation.

The effect of corneal power on the accuracy of 14 IOL power formulas

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates the impact of corneal power on the accuracy of 14 newer intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas in cataract surgery. The aim is to assess how these formulas perform across different corneal curvature ranges, thereby guiding more precise IOL selection.

METHODS

In this retrospective case series, 336 eyes from 336 patients who underwent cataract surgery were studied. The cohort was divided into three groups according to preoperative corneal power. Key metrics analyzed included mean prediction error (PE), standard deviation of PE (SD), mean absolute prediction error (MAE), median absolute error (MedAE), and the percentage of eyes with PE within ± 0.25 D, 0.50 D, ± 0.75 D, ± 1.00 D and ± 2.00 D.

RESULTS

In the flat K group (Km < 43 D), VRF-G, Emmetropia Verifying Optical Version 2.0 (EVO2.0), Kane, and Hoffer QST demonstrated lower SDs (± 0.373D, ± 0.379D, ± 0.380D, ± 0.418D, respectively) compared to the VRF formula (all P < 0.05). EVO2.0 and K6 showed significantly different SDs compared to Barrett Universal II (BUII) (all P < 0.02). In the medium K group (43 D ≤ Km < 46 D), VRF-G, BUII, Karmona, K6, EVO2.0, Kane, and Pearl-DGS recorded lower MAEs (0.307D to 0.320D) than Olsen (OLCR) and Castrop (all P < 0.03), with RBF3.0 having the second lowest MAE (0.309D), significantly lower than VRF and Olsen (OLCR) (all P < 0.05). In the steep K group (Km ≥ 46D), RBF3.0, K6, and Kane achieved significantly lower MAEs (0.279D, 0.290D, 0.291D, respectively) than Castrop (all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The study highlights the varying accuracy of newer IOL formulas based on corneal power. VRF-G, EVO2.0, Kane, K6, and Hoffer QST are highly accurate for flat corneas, while VRF-G, RBF3.0, BUII, Karmona, K6, EVO2.0, Kane, and Pearl-DGS are recommended for medium K corneas. In steep corneas, RBF3.0, K6, and Kane show superior performance.

Initial non-invasive in vivo sensing of the lung using time domain diffuse optics

The in vivo diagnosis and monitoring of pulmonary disorders (caused for example by emphysema, Covid-19, immature lung tissue in infants) could be effectively supported by the non-invasive sensing of the lung through light. With this purpose, we investigated the feasibility of probing the lung by means of time-resolved diffuse optics, leveraging the increased depth (a few centimeters) attained by photons collected after prolonged propagation time (a few nanoseconds). We present an initial study that includes measurements performed on 5 healthy volunteers during a breathing protocol, using a time-resolved broadband diffuse optical spectroscopy system. Those measurements were carried out across the spectral range of 600-1100 nm at a source-detector distance of 3 cm, and at 820 nm over a longer distance (7-9 cm). The preliminary analysis of the in vivo data with a simplified homogeneous model revealed a maximum probing depth of 2.6-3.9 cm, suitable for reaching the lung. Furthermore, we observed variations in signal associated with respiration, particularly evident at long photon propagation times. However, challenges stemming from both intra- and inter-subject variability, along with inconsistencies potentially arising from conflicting scattering and absorption effects on the collected signal, hindered a clear interpretation. Aspects that require further investigation for a more comprehensive understanding are outlined.

Camellin-Calossi Formula for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Patients With Previous Myopic Laser Vision Correction

PURPOSE

To assess the performance of the Camellin-Calossi formula in eyes with prior myopic laser vision correction.

METHODS

This was a retrospective case series. Patients included had a history of uncomplicated myopic laser vision correction and cataract surgery. The primary outcome measures were cumulative distribution of absolute refractive prediction error, absolute refractive prediction error, and refractive prediction error. These parameters were estimated post-hoc using the Camellin-Calossi, Shammas, Haigis-L, Barrett True-K with or without history, Masket, and Modified Masket formulas and their averages starting from biometric data, clinical records, postoperative refraction, and intraocular lens power implanted.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven eyes from 77 patients were included. The Camellin-Calossi, Shammas, Haigis-L, Barrett True-K No History, Masket, Modified Masket, and Barrett True-K formulas showed a median absolute refractive error (interquartile range) of 0.25 (0.53), 0.51 (0.56), 0.44 (0.65), 0.45 (0.59), 0.40 (0.61), 0.60 (0.70), and 0.55 (0.76), respectively. The proportion of eyes with an absolute refractive error of ±0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00, 1.50, and 2.00 diopters (D) for the Camellin-Calossi formula was 54.5%, 72.7%, 85.7%, 92.2%, 98.7%, and 100%, respectively. The cumulative distribution of the Camellin-Calossi formula showed the best qualitative performances when compared to the others. A statistically significant difference was identified with all of the others except the Haigis-L using a threshold of 0.25, with the Shammas, Modified Masket, and Barrett True-K at a threshold of 0.50 D and the Barrett True-K and Modified Masket at a threshold of 1.00 D.

CONCLUSIONS

The Camellin-Calossi formula is a valid option for intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with prior myopic laser vision correction. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(3):e156-e163.].

Limitations of constant optimization with disclosed intraocular lens power formulae

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of formula constants on predicted refraction and limitations of constant optimization for classical and modern intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulae.

SETTING

Tertiary care center.

DESIGN

Retrospective single-center consecutive case series.

METHODS

This analysis is based on a dataset of 888 eyes before and after cataract surgery with IOL implantation (Hoya Vivinex). Spherical equivalent refraction predSEQ was predicted using IOLMaster 700 data, IOL power, and formula constants from IOLCon ( https://iolcon.org ). The formula prediction error (PE) was derived as predSEQ minus achieved spherical equivalent refraction for the SRKT, Hoffer Q, Holladay, Haigis, and Castrop formulae. The gradient of predSEQ (gradSEQ) as a measure for the effect of the constants on refraction was calculated and used for constant optimization.

RESULTS

Using initial formula constants, the mean PE was -0.1782 ± 0.4450, -0.1814 ± 0.4159, -0.1702 ± 0.4207, -0.1211 ± 0.3740, and -0.1912 ± 0.3449 diopters (D) for the SRKT, Hoffer Q, Holladay, Haigis, and Castrop formulas, respectively. gradSEQ for all formula constants (except gradSEQ for the Castrop R) decay with axial length because of interaction with the effective lens position (ELP). Constant optimization for a zero mean PE (SD: 0.4410, 0.4307, 0.4272, 0.3742, 0.3436 D) results in a change in the PE trend over axial length in all formulae where the constant acts directly on the ELP.

CONCLUSIONS

With IOL power calculation formulae where the constant(s) act directly on the ELP, a change in constant(s) always changes the trend of the PE according to gradSEQ. Formulae where at least 1 constant does not act on the ELP have more flexibility to zero the mean or median PE without coupling with a PE trend error over axial length.

Accuracy of the PEARL-DGS Formula for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Post-Myopic Laser Refractive Corneal Surgery Eyes

PURPOSE

To investigate the accuracy of the PEARL-DGS formula for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in post-myopic laser refractive corneal surgery eyes.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

A total of 139 eyes of 139 patients (mean axial length: 27.4 ± 2.1 mm) who had prior myopic laser refractive corneal surgery and subsequent cataract surgery using Tecnis ZCB00 from March 2018 to February 2023 were included. Refractive outcomes of 5 formulas (Barrett True K, Haigis-L, Hoffer-QST, PEARL-DGS, and Shammas-PL) were evaluated. Prediction error was defined as the difference between the measured and predicted postoperative refractive spherical equivalent using the IOL power actually implanted. Mean prediction error (MPE), median absolute prediction error (MedAE), and mean absolute prediction error were calculated.

RESULTS

Without constant optimization, the PEARL-DGS resulted in a MPE of +0.05 ± 0.65 diopters (D), whereas the other formulas resulted in myopic shifts. The MedAEs of the formulas were 0.39, 0.53, 0.65, 0.85, and 1.11 D for the PEARL-DGS, Hoffer-QST, Barrett True K, Shammas-PL, and Haigis-L, respectively, in order of magnitude (P < .05). With constant optimization, there were no statistically significant differences in the MedAEs among the 5 formulas (P = .388).

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison to other IOL formulas, the PEARL-DGS resulted in better refractive outcomes after cataract surgery in post-myopic laser refractive corneal surgery eyes without constant optimization. We suggest that PEARL-DGS be considered as the first choice for IOL power calculation in these eyes when the clinicians do not have their optimized constants.

Peak Cone Density Predicted from Outer Segment Length Measured on Optical Coherence Tomography

PURPOSE

To compare peak cone density predicted from outer segment length measured on optical coherence tomography with direct measures of peak cone density from adaptive optics scanning light ophthalmoscopy.

METHODS

Data from 42 healthy participants with direct peak cone density measures and optical coherence tomography line scans available were used in this study. Longitudinal reflectivity profiles were analyzed using two methods of identifying the boundaries of the ellipsoid and interdigitation zones to estimate maximum outer segment length: peak-to-peak and the slope method. These maximum outer segment length values were then used to predict peak cone density using a previously described geometrical model. A comparison between predicted and direct peak cone density measures was then performed.

RESULTS

The mean bias between observers for estimating maximum outer segment length across methods was less than 2 µm. Cone density predicted from the peak-to-peak method against direct cone density measures showed a mean bias of 6,812 cones/mm2 with 50% of participants displaying a 10% difference or less between predicted and direct cone density values. Cone density derived from the slope method showed a mean bias of -17,929 cones/mm2 relative to direct cone density measures, with only 41% of participants demonstrating less than a 10% difference between direct and predicted cone density values.

CONCLUSION

Predicted foveal cone density derived from peak-to-peak outer segment length measurements using commercial optical coherence tomography show modest agreement with direct measures of peak cone density from adaptive optics scanning light ophthalmoscopy. The methods used here are imperfect predictors of cone density, however, further exploration of this relationship could reveal a clinically relevant marker of cone structure.

Full-aperture extended-depth oblique plane microscopy through dynamic remote focusing

Significance

The reprojection setup typical of oblique plane microscopy (OPM) limits the effective aperture of the imaging system, and therefore its efficiency and resolution. Large aperture system is only possible through the use of custom specialized optics. A full-aperture OPM made with off the shelf components would both improve the performance of the method and encourage its widespread adoption.

Aim

To prove the feasibility of an OPM without a conventional reprojection setup, retaining the full aperture of the primary objective employed.

Approach

A deformable lens based remote focusing setup synchronized with the rolling shutter of a complementary metal-oxide semiconductor detector is used instead of a traditional reprojection system.

Results

The system was tested on microbeads, prepared slides, and zebrafish embryos. Resolution and pixel throughput were superior to conventional OPM with cropped apertures, and comparable with OPM implementations with custom made optical components.

Conclusions

An easily reproducible approach to OPM imaging is presented, eliminating the conventional reprojection setup and exploiting the full aperture of the employed objective.

Calculation of the total corneal astigmatism using the virtual cross cylinder method on the secondary principal plane of the cornea

This study aimed to establish a virtual cross cylinder method to calculate the total corneal astigmatism by combining the anterior and posterior corneal astigmatism on the secondary principal plane of the cornea based on Gaussian optics. The meridian with the least refractive power, namely, the flattest meridian of the virtual cross cylinder of a ± 0.5 × C diopter, is set as the reference meridian, and the power (F) at an angle of φ between an arbitrary meridian and the reference meridian is defined as F(φ) =  - 0.5 × C × cos2φ. The magnitude and axis of the total corneal astigmatism were calculated by applying trigonometric functions and the atan2 function based on the combination of the virtual cross cylinders of the anterior corneal astigmatism and the posterior corneal astigmatism. To verify the performance of the virtual cross cylinder method, a verification experiment with two Jackson cross cylinders and a lensmeter was performed, and the measured and calculated values were compared. The limit of the natural domain of the arctangent function is circumvented by using the atan2 function. The magnitude and axis of the total corneal astigmatism are determined through generalized mathematical expressions. The verification experiment results showed good agreement between the measured and calculated values. Compared to the vector analysis method, the virtual cross cylinder method is mathematically sound and straightforward. A novel technique for calculating total corneal astigmatism, the virtual cross cylinder method, was developed and verified.

Comparison of the formula accuracy for calculating multifocal intraocular lens power: a single center retrospective study in Korean patients

This study evaluated the accuracy of newer formulas (Barrett Universal II, EVO 2.0, Kane, Hoffer QST, and PEARL-DGS) and the Haigis formula in Korean patients with the Alcon TFNT multifocal intraocular lens. In total, 3100 randomly selected eyes of 3100 patients were retrospectively reviewed. After constant optimization, the standard deviation (SD) of the prediction error was assessed for the entire group, and the root mean square error was compared for short and long axial length (AL) subgroup analysis. The Cooke-modified AL (CMAL) was experimentally applied to the Haigis formula. All the newer formulas performed well, but they did not significantly outperform the Haigis formula. In addition, all the newer formulas exhibited significant myopic outcomes (- 0.23 to - 0.29 diopters) in long eyes. Application of the CMAL to the Haigis formula with single constant optimization produced similar behavior and higher correlation with the newer formulas. The CMAL-applied triple-optimized Haigis formula yielded a substantially smaller SD, even superior to the Barrett and Hoffer QST formulas. The AL modification algorithms such as the CMAL used in newer formulas to cope with optical biometry's overestimation of the AL in long eyes seemed to overcompensate, particularly in the long eyes of the East Asian population.

Modified intraocular lens power selection method according to biometric subgroups Eom IOL power calculator

This study evaluates the accuracy of a newly developed intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation method that applies four different IOL power calculation formulas according to 768 biometric subgroups based on keratometry, anterior chamber depth, and axial length. This retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted in at Korea University Ansan Hospital. A total of 1600 eyes from 1600 patients who underwent phacoemulsification and a ZCB00 IOL in-the-bag implantation were divided into two datasets: a reference dataset (1200 eyes) and a validation dataset (400 eyes). Using the reference dataset and the results of previous studies, the Eom IOL power calculator was developed using 768 biometric subgroups. The median absolute errors (MedAEs) and IOL Formula Performance Indexes (FPIs) of the Barrett Universal II, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Ladas Super, SRK/T, and Eom formulas using the 400-eye validation dataset were compared. The MedAE of the Eom formula (0.22 D) was significantly smaller than that of the other four formulas, except for the Barrett Universal II and Ladas Super formulas (0.24 D and 0.23 D, respectively). The IOL FPI of the Eom formula was 0.553, which ranked first, followed by the Ladas Super (0.474), Barrett Universal II (0.470), Holladay 1 (0.444), Hoffer Q (0.396), Haigis (0.392), and SRK/T (0.361) formulas. In conclusion, the Eom IOL power calculator developed in this study demonstrated similar or slightly better accuracy than the Barrett Universal II and Ladas Super formulas and was superior to the four traditional IOL power calculation formulas.

Geometric transformation adaptive optics (GTAO) for volumetric deep brain imaging through gradient-index lenses

The advance of genetic function indicators has enabled the observation of neuronal activities at single-cell resolutions. A major challenge for the applications on mammalian brains is the limited optical access depth. Currently, the method of choice to access deep brain structures is to insert miniature optical components. Among these validated miniature optics, the gradient-index (GRIN) lens has been widely employed for its compactness and simplicity. However, due to strong fourth-order astigmatism, GRIN lenses suffer from a small imaging field of view, which severely limits the measurement throughput and success rate. To overcome these challenges, we developed geometric transformation adaptive optics (GTAO), which enables adaptable achromatic large-volume correction through GRIN lenses. We demonstrate its major advances through in vivo structural and functional imaging of mouse brains. The results suggest that GTAO can serve as a versatile solution to enable large-volume recording of deep brain structures and activities through GRIN lenses.

The accuracy of the trifocal IOL calculation using equivalent K-readings and total corneal power in different zones

PURPOSE

To identify the equivalent K-readings and total keratometry zones that is optimally suitable for calculating the IOL spheroequivalent according to 7 formulas.

METHODS

The study included 40 patients (40 eyes) who underwent uneventful femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery and refractive lens exchange (RLE) with implantation of a trifocal diffractive IOL (PanOptix, Alcon inc.). Targeted emmetropia was achieved in all patients, no distance and near correction was needed. Retrospective IOL calculations were performed utilizing 7 formulas (SRK/T, Holladay 1 and 2, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Barrett Universal 2, Olsen) and Pentacam keratometry data: Holladay equivalent K-readings, total optical power by ray tracing (TCRP) centered on the apex and pupil in 10 zones (from 0.5 to 5 mm in 0.5 mm increments). For each formula/zone/map combination: postoperative predicted refraction (PPRs), mean absolute errors (MAEs), and median absolute errors (MedAEs) were analyzed.

RESULTS

According to EKR, the Haigis formula showed the lowest error in the central zones up to 3.5 mm, the TCRP zone for Holladay I and II formulas 4.0-4.5 mm, for HofferQ and SRK/T formulas 4.5-5.0 mm, and for Olsen and Barrett II Universal-5 mm.

CONCLUSION

The use of keratometry data (EKR, TCRP) in the formulas adapted to SimK, with the correct choice of the evaluation zone of keratometric data, will increase the chance of hitting the refractive target.

Theoretical Accuracy of the Raytracing Method for Intraocular Calculation of Lens Power in Myopic Eyes after Small Incision Extraction of the Lenticule

AIM

To evaluate the accuracy of the raytracing method for the calculation of intraocular lens (IOL) power in myopic eyes after small incision extraction of the lenticule (SMILE).

METHODS

Retrospective study. All patients undergoing surgery for myopic SMILE between May 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020, with Scheimpflug tomography optical biometry were eligible for inclusion. Manifest refraction was performed before and 6 months after refractive surgery. One eye from each patient was included in the final analysis. A theoretical model was invited to predict the accuracy of multiple methods of lens power calculation by comparing the IOL-induced refractive error at the corneal plane (IOL-Dif) and the SMILE-induced change of spherical equivalent (SMILE-Dif) before and after SMILE surgery. The prediction error (PE) was calculated as the difference between SMILE-Dif-IOL-Dif. IOL power calculations were performed using raytracing (Olsen Raytracing, Pentacam AXL, software version 1.22r05, Wetzlar, Germany) and other formulae with historical data (Barrett True-K, Double-K SRK/T, Masket, Modified Masket) and without historical data (Barrett True-K no history, Haigis-L, Hill Potvin Shammas PM, Shammas-PL) for the same IOL power and model. In addition, subgroup analysis was performed in different anterior chamber depths, axial lengths, back-to-front corneal radius ratio, keratometry, lens thickness, and preoperative spherical equivalents.

RESULTS

A total of 70 eyes of 70 patients were analyzed. The raytracing method had the smallest mean absolute PE (0.26 ± 0.24 D) and median absolute PE (0.16 D), and also had the largest percentage of eyes within a PE of ± 0.25 D (64.3%), ± 0.50 D (81.4%), ± 0.75 D (95.7%), and ± 1.00 D (100.0%). The raytracing method was significantly better than Double-K SRK/T, Haigis, Haigis-L, and Shammas-PL formulae in postoperative refraction prediction (all p < 0.001), but not better than the following formulae: Barrett True-K (p = 0.314), Barrett True-K no history (p = 0.163), Masket (p = 1.0), Modified Masket (p = 0.806), and Hill Potvin Shammas PM (p = 0.286). Subgroup analysis showed that refractive outcomes exhibited no statistically significant differences in the raytracing method (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Raytracing was the most accurate method in predicting target refraction and had a good consistency in calculating IOL power for myopic eyes after SMILE.

Monte-Carlo simulation of a thick lens IOL power calculation

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this Monte-Carlo study is to investigate the effect of using a thick lens model instead of a thin lens model for the intraocular lens (IOL) on the resulting refraction at the spectacle plane and on the ocular magnification based on a large clinical data set.

METHODS

A pseudophakic model eye with a thin spectacle correction, a thick cornea (curvatures for both surfaces and central thickness) and a thick IOL (equivalent power PL derived from a thin lens IOL, Coddington factor CL (uniformly distributed from -1.0 to 1.0), either preset central thickness LT = 0.9 mm (A) or optic edge thickness ET = 0.2 mm, (B)) was set up. Calculations were performed on a clinical data set containing 21 108 biometric measurements of a cataractous population based on linear Gaussian optics to derive spectacle refraction and ocular magnification using the thin and thick lens IOL models.

RESULTS

A prediction model (restricted to linear terms without interactions) was derived based on the relevant parameters identified with a stepwise linear regression approach to provide a simple method for estimating the change in spectacle refraction and ocular magnification where a thick lens IOL is used instead of a thin lens IOL. The change in spectacle refraction using a thick lens IOL with (A) or (B) instead of a thin lens IOL with identical power was within limits of around ±1.5 dpt when the thick lens IOL was placed with its haptic plane at the plane of the thin lens IOL. In contrast, the change in ocular magnification from considering the IOL as a thick lens instead of a thin lens was small and not clinically significant.

CONCLUSION

This Monte-Carlo simulation shows the impact of using a thick lens model IOL with preset LT or ET on the resulting spherical equivalent refraction and ocular magnification. If IOL manufacturers would provide all relevant data on IOL design data and refractive index for all power steps, this would make it possible to perform direct calculations of refraction and ocular magnification.

Refractive Outcomes With New Generation Formulas for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Radial Keratotomy Patients

PURPOSE

Radial keratotomies (RKs) are responsible for corneal irregularities resulting in biometric errors and lower best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) due to lower-order and higher-order optical aberrations. The aim of the study was to compare performances of new and old generation formulas in a population of RK patients.

METHODS

RK patients who underwent phacoemulsification with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation were retrospectively recruited. Inclusion criteria were availability of preoperative and 6-month postoperative BCVA assessment, topography, and tomography. Documented refraction instability, corneal ectasia, and previous ocular surgery except for RK were exclusion criteria. Mean prediction error (ME), mean absolute prediction error (MAE), and incidence of MAE > 0.25D were calculated for SRK-T, Barrett True K, EVO 2.0, Kane, and PEARL-DGS.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients with a mean baseline BCVA of 0.32 ± 0.18 logMAR and a mean corneal root mean square (RMS) value of 1.59 ± 0.91 μm were included. EVO 2.0, Kane, and PEARL-DGS showed a significantly lower MAE and lower ME compared with all other formulas ( P < 0.001 and P < 0.001) and a significant lower incidence of MAE >0.25D ( P < 0.001). Significant differences were still detected when using 3-mm mean keratometry for IOL calculation.

CONCLUSIONS

PEARL-DGS, Kane, and EVO 2.0 formulas show superior accuracy in IOL power calculation compared with SRK-T and Barrett True K in RK patients, with no significant differences between the 3.

Breaking Barriers: Exploring Neurotransmitters through In Vivo vs. In Vitro Rivalry

Neurotransmitter analysis plays a pivotal role in diagnosing and managing neurodegenerative diseases, often characterized by disturbances in neurotransmitter systems. However, prevailing methods for quantifying neurotransmitters involve invasive procedures or require bulky imaging equipment, therefore restricting accessibility and posing potential risks to patients. The innovation of compact, in vivo instruments for neurotransmission analysis holds the potential to reshape disease management. This innovation can facilitate non-invasive and uninterrupted monitoring of neurotransmitter levels and their activity. Recent strides in microfabrication have led to the emergence of diminutive instruments that also find applicability in in vitro investigations. By harnessing the synergistic potential of microfluidics, micro-optics, and microelectronics, this nascent realm of research holds substantial promise. This review offers an overarching view of the current neurotransmitter sensing techniques, the advances towards in vitro microsensors tailored for monitoring neurotransmission, and the state-of-the-art fabrication techniques that can be used to fabricate those microsensors.

Near eye display based on multiplexed retinal projections for robust compensation of eye pupil variance

Among various specifications of near eye display (NED) devices, a compact formfactor is essential for comfortable user experience but also the hardest one to accomplish due to the slowest progresses. A pinhole/pinlight array based light-field (LF) technique is considered as one of the candidates to achieve that goal without thicker and heavier refractive optics. Despite those promising advantages, however, there are critical issues, such as dark spots and contrast distortion, which degrade the image quality because of the vulnerability of the LF retinal image when the observer's eye pupil size changes. Regardless of previous attempts to overcome those artifacts, it was impossible to resolve both issues due to their trade-off relation. In this paper, in order to resolve them simultaneously, we propose a concept of multiplexed retinal projections to integrate the LF retinal image through rotating transitions of refined and modulated elemental images for robust compensation of eye pupil variance with improved conservation of contrast distribution. Experimental demonstrations and quantitative analysis are also provided to verify the principle.

Toward point-of-care diagnostics: Running enzymatic assays on a photonic waveguide-based sensor chip with a portable, benchtop measurement system

We demonstrate a portable, compact system to perform absorption-based enzymatic assays at a visible wavelength of 639 nm on a photonic waveguide-based sensor chip, suitable for lab-on-a-chip applications. The photonic design and fabrication of the sensor are described, and a detailed overview of the portable measurement system is presented. In this publication, we use an integrated photonic waveguide-based absorbance sensor to run a full enzymatic assay. An assay to detect creatinine in plasma is simultaneously performed on both the photonic sensor on the portable setup and on a commercial microplate reader for a clinically relevant creatinine concentration range. We observed a high correlation between the measured waveguide propagation loss and the optical density measurement from the plate reader and measured a limit-of-detection of 4.5 μM creatinine in the sensor well, covering the relevant clinical range for creatinine detection.

Performance of IOL calculation formulas that use measured posterior corneal power in eyes following myopic laser vision correction

PURPOSE

To compare the predictive accuracy of the biometer-embedded Barrett True-K TK and new total corneal power methods of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in eyes with prior laser vision correction (LVC) for myopia.

SETTING

Academic clinical practice.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

IOL power formulas were assessed using measurements from a swept-source optical coherence biometer. Refractive prediction errors were calculated for the Barrett True-K TK, EVO 2.0, Pearl-DGS, and HofferQST, which use both anterior and posterior corneal curvature measurements. These were compared with the Shammas, Haigis-L, Barrett True-K No History (NH), optical coherence tomography, and 4-formula average (AVG-4) on the ASCRS postrefractive calculator, and to the Holladay 1 and 2 with non linear axial length regressions (H1- and H2-NLR).

RESULTS

The study comprised 85 eyes from 85 patients. Only the Barrett True-K TK and EVO 2.0 had mean numerical errors that were not significantly different from 0. The EVO 2.0, Barrett True-K TK, Pearl-DGS, AVG-4, H2-NLR, and Barrett True-K NH were selected for further pairwise analysis. The Barrett True-K TK and EVO 2.0 demonstrated smaller root-mean-square absolute error compared with the Pearl-DGS, and the Barrett True-K TK also had a smaller mean absolute error than the Pearl-DGS.

CONCLUSIONS

The Barrett True-K TK and EVO 2.0 formulas had comparable performance to existing formulas in eyes with prior myopic LVC.

Optimization of biometry for best refractive outcome in cataract surgery

High-precision biometry and accurate intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation have become essential components of cataract surgery. In clinical practice, IOL power calculation involves measuring parameters such as corneal power and axial length and then applying a power calculation formula. The importance of posterior corneal curvature in determining the true power of the cornea is increasingly being recognized, and newer investigative modalities that can estimate both the anterior and posterior corneal power are becoming the standard of care. Optical biometry, especially using swept-source biometers, with an accuracy of 0.01-0.02 mm, has become the state-of-the-art method in biometry. With the evolution of IOL formulas, the ultimate goal of achieving a given target refraction has also moved closer to accuracy. However, despite these technological efforts to standardize and calibrate methods of IOL power calculation, achieving a mean absolute error of zero for every patient undergoing cataract surgery may not be possible. This is due to inherent consistent bias and systematic errors in the measurement devices, IOL formulas, and the individual bias of the surgeon. Optimization and personalization of lens constants allow for the incorporation of these systematic errors as well as individual bias, thereby further improving IOL power prediction accuracy. Our review provides a comprehensive overview of parameters for accurate biometry, along with considerations to enhance IOL power prediction accuracy through optimization and personalization. We conducted a detailed search in PubMed and Google Scholar by using a combination of MeSH terms and specific keywords such as "ocular biometry," "IOL power calculations," "prediction accuracy of refractive outcome in cataract surgery," "effective lens position," "intraocular lens calculation formulas," and "optimization of A-constants" to find relevant literature. We identified and analyzed 121 relevant articles, and their findings were included.