Estimation of the effective lens position using a rotating Scheimpflug camera

Influencing factors of effective lens position in patients with Marfan syndrome and ectopia lentis

AIMS

The aim of this study was to analyse the effective lens position (ELP) in patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS) and ectopia lentis (EL).

METHODS

Patients with MFS undergoing lens removal and primary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation were enrolled in the study. The back-calculated ELP was obtained with the vergence formula and compared with the theoretical ELPs. The back-calculated ELP and ELP error were evaluated among demographic and biometric parameters, including axial length (AL), corneal curvature radius (CCR) and white-to-white (WTW).

RESULTS

A total of 292 eyes from 200 patients were included. The back-calculated ELP was lower in patients undergoing scleral-fixated IOL than those receiving in-the-bag IOL implantation (4.54 (IQR 3.65-5.20) mm vs 4.98 (IQR 4.56-5.67) mm, p<0.001). The theoretical ELP of the SRK/T formula exhibited the highest accuracy, with no difference from the back-calculated ELP in patients undergoing in-the-bag IOL implantation (5.11 (IQR 4.83-5.65) mm vs 4.98 (IQR 4.56-5.67) mm, p=0.209). The ELP errors demonstrated significant correlations with refraction prediction error (PE): a 1 mm ELP error led to PE of 2.42D (AL<22 mm), 1.47D (22 mm≤AL<26 mm) and 0.54D (AL≥26 mm). Multivariate analysis revealed significant correlations of ELP with AL (b=0.43, p<0.001), CCR (b=-0.85, p<0.001) and WTW (b=0.41, p=0.004).

CONCLUSION

This study provides novel insights into the origin of PE in patients with MFS and EL and potentially refines existing formulas.

Network Meta-analysis of No-History Methods to Calculate Intraocular Lens Power in Eyes With Previous Myopic Laser Refractive Surgery

PURPOSE

To systematically compare and rank the predictability of no-history intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation methods after myopic laser refractive surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the U.S. trial registry (www.ClinicalTrial.gov) were used to systematically search trials published up to August 2019. Included were case series studies reporting the following outcomes in patients with cataract undergoing phacoemulsification after laser refractive surgery: percentage of eyes with a refractive prediction error (PE) within ±0.50 and ±1.00 diopters (D), mean absolute error (MAE), and median absolute error (MedAE). A network meta-analysis was conducted using the STATA software version 13.1 (STATACorp LLC).

RESULTS

Nineteen studies involving 1,098 eyes and 19 formulas were identified. A network meta-analysis for the percentage of eyes with a PE within ±0.50 D found that ray-tracing (Okulix), intraoperative aberrometry (Optiwave Refractive Analysis [ORA]), BESSt, and Seitz/Speicher/Savini (Triple-S) (D-K SRK/T), and Fourier-Domain OCT-Based formulas were more predictive than the Wang/Koch/Maloney, Shammas-PL, modified Rosa, Ferrara, and Equivalent K reading at 4.5 mm using the Double-K Holladay 1 formulas. With regard to ranking, the top four formulas as per the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values for the percentage of eyes with a PE within ±0.50 D were the Okulix, ORA, BESSt, and Triple-S (D-K SRK/T). With regard to MAE, the ORA showed lower errors when compared to the Shammas-PL formula. In this regard, the top four formulas based on the SUCRA values were the Triple-S, BESSt, ORA, and Fourier-Domain OCT-Based formulas. The SToP (SRK/T), ORA, Fourier-Domain OCT-Based, and BESSt formulas had the lowest MedAE.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering all three outcome measures of highest percentages of eyes with a PE within ±0.50 and ±1.00 D, lowest MAE, and lowest MedAE, the top three no-history formulas for IOL power calculation in eyes with previous myopic corneal laser refractive surgery were: ORA, BESSt, and Triple-S (D-K SRK/T). [J Refract Surg. 2020;36(7):481-490.].

Effective Lens Position According to Incision Width in Cataract Surgery Using Phacoemultification and Posterior Chamber Lens Implantation

PURPOSE

To compare effective lens position (ELP) after phacoemulsification between micro-incision (2.25 mm) and small-incision (2.75 mm) groups.

METHODS

Sixty-seven eyes with age-related cataracts were randomly divided into two groups based on the width of the corneal incision (micro-incision [n = 33] and small-incision groups [n = 34]). Participants underwent clear corneal incision phacoemulsification combined with intraocular lens implantation. Uncorrected visual acuity, refractive error, corneal astigmatism, and ELP were measured preoperatively and at 2 months postoperatively. ELP was calculated using the Sheimpflug method.

RESULTS

Postoperative mean visual acuity and refractive error did not differ between the groups (logMAR 0.02 vs. logMAR 0.04, P = 0.108; -0.30 diopter [D] vs. + 0.07 D, P = 0.339). The postoperative surgically-induced corneal astigmatism was higher in the small-incision group than it was in the micro-incision group, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (+ 0.01 D vs. -0.36 D, P = 0.063). The mean difference between the pre and postoperative ELP values was significantly higher in the small-incision group than that in the micro-incision group (-0.04 mm vs. -0.51 mm, P = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

Although there was no significant difference in postoperative refractive error and corneal astigmatism between the micro- and small-incision phacoemulsification groups, the mean error between pre and postoperative ELP was higher in eyes that underwent phacoemulsification with larger corneal incisions than it was in those that underwent smaller incisions.

Change of Capsulotomy Over 1 Year in Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery and Its Impact on Visual Quality

PURPOSE

To compare the shape of the capsulotomy, its change, and its impact on visual quality over 1 year using the femtosecond laser system from the manual technique.

METHODS

In this two-center cross-sectional study from May 2012 to June 2013, each patient had femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery in one eye (FLACS group) and conventional phacoemulsification cataract surgery in the other eye (CPCS group). An evaluation of the capsulotomy was performed using retroillumination slit-lamp photographs at 7 days, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery. Effective lens position (ELP), refractive error, and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients were included in the study. Diameters of capsulorhexis were more precise and deviation surfaces were lower in the FLACS group than in the CPCS group at each evaluation (P < .05). Femtosecond laser capsulotomies were less modified over time than manual continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis. No significant differences were observed for CDVA, refractive error, and ELP between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

More precise capsulotomy sizing can be achieved with the femtosecond laser compared to continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis. Femtosecond laser capsulotomies are less modified over time but did not improve ELP or visual quality. [J Refract Surg. 2017;33(1):44-49].

Influence of Patient Age on Intraocular Lens Power Prediction Error

PURPOSE

To examine whether intraocular lens (IOL) power prediction error (PE) after cataract surgery differs according to patient age.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

METHODS

We consecutively enrolled 75 eyes of 75 patients 59 years of age or younger, and 150 eyes of 150 patients in each of 3 age groups (60-69, 70-79, and 80-89 years), for whom phacoemulsification and implantation of a single-piece acrylic IOL was planned. The IOL power was calculated using the optimized SRK/T formula. Objective refraction was measured using an autorefractometer at approximately 3 months postoperatively, and the mean arithmetic PE and median absolute PE were compared among age groups.

RESULTS

The mean preoperative refractive error predicted by the SRK/T formula was similar among age groups (P = .4179). The mean postoperative spherical equivalent was significantly more myopic in younger patients (P < .0001). Mean PE was -0.24 diopters (D) in those ≤59 years of age, -0.17 D in those 60-69 years of age, -0.11 D in those 70-79 years of age, and -0.05 D in those 80-89 years of age; the mean PE was less myopic in older patients (P = .0008). The median absolute PE did not differ significantly among groups (P = .6192). Mean PE was positively correlated with age (P < .0001). Multiple regression analysis revealed that age, preoperative axial length, average corneal curvature, and anterior chamber depth were independent predictors of the age-related difference in PE.

CONCLUSION

PE was less myopic by approximately 0.06 D per decade as age increased, suggesting that patient age should be considered when selecting IOL power.

Error induced by the estimation of the corneal power and the effective lens position with a rotationally asymmetric refractive multifocal intraocular lens

AIM

To evaluate the prediction error in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation for a rotationally asymmetric refractive multifocal IOL and the impact on this error of the optimization of the keratometric estimation of the corneal power and the prediction of the effective lens position (ELP).

METHODS

Retrospective study including a total of 25 eyes of 13 patients (age, 50 to 83y) with previous cataract surgery with implantation of the Lentis Mplus LS-312 IOL (Oculentis GmbH, Germany). In all cases, an adjusted IOL power (PIOLadj) was calculated based on Gaussian optics using a variable keratometric index value (nkadj) for the estimation of the corneal power (Pkadj) and on a new value for ELP (ELPadj) obtained by multiple regression analysis. This PIOLadj was compared with the IOL power implanted (PIOLReal) and the value proposed by three conventional formulas (Haigis, Hoffer Q and Holladay I).

RESULTS

PIOLReal was not significantly different than PIOLadj and Holladay IOL power (P>0.05). In the Bland and Altman analysis, PIOLadj showed lower mean difference (-0.07 D) and limits of agreement (of 1.47 and -1.61 D) when compared to PIOLReal than the IOL power value obtained with the Holladay formula. Furthermore, ELPadj was significantly lower than ELP calculated with other conventional formulas (P<0.01) and was found to be dependent on axial length, anterior chamber depth and Pkadj.

CONCLUSION

Refractive outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of the multifocal IOL Lentis Mplus LS-312 can be optimized by minimizing the keratometric error and by estimating ELP using a mathematical expression dependent on anatomical factors.

Estimation of intraocular lens power calculation after myopic corneal refractive surgery: using corneal height in anterior segment optical coherence tomography

PURPOSE

To investigate the feasibility of estimating effective lens position (ELP) and calculating intraocular lens power using corneal height (CH), as measured using anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT), in patients who have undergone corneal refractive surgery.

METHODS

This study included 23 patients (30 eyes) who have undergone myopic corneal refractive surgery and subsequent successful cataract surgery. The CH was measured with AS-OCT, and the measured ELP (ELPm) was calculated. Intraocular lens power, which could achieve actual emmetropia (Preal), was determined with medical records. Estimated ELP (ELPest) was back-calculated using Preal, axial length, and keratometric value through the SRK/T formula. After searching the best-fit regression formula between ELPm and ELPest, converted ELP and intraocular lens power (ELPconv, Pconv) were obtained and then compared to ELPest and Preal, respectively. The proportion of eyes within a defined error was investigated.

RESULTS

Mean CH, ELPest, and ELPm were 3.71 ± 0.23, 7.74 ± 1.09, 5.78 ± 0.26 mm, respectively. The ELPm and ELPest were linearly correlated (ELPest = 1.841 × ELPm - 2.018, p = 0.023, R = 0.410) and ELPconv and Pconv agreed well with ELPest and Preal, respectively. Eyes within ±0.5, ±1.0, ±1.5, and ±2.0 diopters of the calculated Pconv, were 23.3%, 66.6%, 83.3%, and 100.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraocular lens power calculation using CH measured with AS-OCT shows comparable accuracy to several conventional methods in eyes following corneal refractive surgery.

Intraocular lens power calculation following laser refractive surgery

Refractive outcomes following cataract surgery in patients that have previously undergone laser refractive surgery have traditionally been underwhelming. This is related to several key issues including the preoperative assessment (keratometry) and intraocular lens power calculations. Peer-reviewed literature is overwhelmed by the influx of methodology to manipulate the corneal or intraocular lens (IOL) powers following refractive surgery. This would suggest that the optimal derivative formula has yet been introduced. This review discusses the problems facing surgeons approaching IOL calculations in these post-refractive laser patients, the existing formulae and programs to address these concerns. Prior published outcomes will be reviewed.

Orbscan II and double-K method for IOL calculation after refractive surgery

BACKGROUND

Precise IOL calculation in post-refractive surgery patients is still a challenge for the cataract surgeon. The purpose of this study is to test whether adding Orbscan II values into the double-K method improves IOL calculation in this group of patients.

METHODS

A prospective study with 43 eyes previously submitted to refractive surgery that underwent cataract extraction. IOL calculation was performed with double-K method. Post-K value was derived from Orbscan total-mean power map. The average corneal curvature of the general population (43.8D) was used as the pre-K value. Refraction results 30 days after surgery were compared with refraction that would be obtained if we used: (1) post-K values from keratometry, (2) post-K values from topography, and (3) pre-K values from Orbscan total-mean power. Anterior chamber depth measures obtained with the IOL Master and Orbscan II were compared.

RESULTS

Mean postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) was -0.25 ± 1.10 D in eyes submitted to radial keratotomy , -1.04 ± 1.42 D in eyes previously submitted to myopic Lasik, and +0.05 ± 1.76 D in those submitted to hyperopic surgeries. Had we inputted post-K values derived from keratometer and from topography, we would have obtained significantly higher postoperative refractive errors in eyes previously submitted to myopic refractive surgery (p < 0.05). Refractions using pre-K derived from the central 8 mm Orbscan instead of 43.8 D were similar in all studied groups (p > 0.05). Anterior chamber depth measured with IOL Master or Orbscan were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Orbscan measurements used as the post-K values into the double-K method provide a precise IOL calculation, especially in post myopic refractive surgery patients.

Estimation of effective lens position using a method independent of preoperative keratometry readings

PURPOSE

To evaluate the validity of a keratometry (K)-independent method of estimating effective lens position (ELP) before phacoemulsification cataract surgery.

SETTING

Institute of Eye Surgery, Whitfield Clinic, Waterford, Ireland.

DESIGN

Evaluation of diagnostic test or technology.

METHODS

The anterior chamber diameter and corneal height in eyes scheduled for cataract surgery were measured with a rotating Scheimpflug camera. Corneal height and anterior chamber diameter were used to estimate the ELP in a K-independent method (using the SRK/T [ELP(rs)] and Holladay 1 [ELP(rh)] formulas).

RESULTS

The mean ELP was calculated using the traditional (mean ELP(s) 5.59 mm ± 0.52 mm [SD]; mean ELP(h) 5.63 ± 0.42 mm) and K-independent (mean ELP(rs) 5.55 ± 0.42 mm; mean ELP(rh) ± SD 5.60 ± 0.36 mm) methods. Agreement between ELP(s) and ELP(rs) and between ELP(h) and ELP(rh) were represented by Bland-Altman plots, with mean differences (± 1.96 SD) of 0.06 ± 0.65 mm (range -0.59 to +0.71 mm; P=.08) in association with ELP(rs) and -0.04 ± 0.39 mm (range -0.43 to +0.35 mm; P=.08) in association with ELP(rh). The mean absolute error for ELP(s) versus ELP(rs) estimation and for ELP(h) versus ELP(rh) estimation was 0.242 ± 0.222 mm (range 0.001 to 1.272 mm) and 0.152 ± 0.137 mm (range 0.001 to 0.814 mm), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms that the K-independent ELP estimation method is comparable to traditional K-dependent methods and may be useful in post-refractive surgery patients.

Intraocular lens power calculation after myopic excimer laser surgery: clinical comparison of published methods

PURPOSE

To compare results of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation methods after myopic excimer laser surgery.

SETTING

Private practice.

METHODS

In this prospective study, eyes having phacoemulsification after myopic excimer laser surgery were classified into Group 1 (preoperative corneal power available, refractive change known), Group 2 (preoperative corneal power available, refractive change uncertain), and Group 3 (preoperative corneal power unavailable, refractive change known even if uncertain). The IOL power was calculated using the following methods: clinical history, Awwad, Camellin/Calossi, Diehl, Feiz, Ferrara, Latkany, Masket, Rosa, Savini, Shammas, Seitz/Speicher, and Seitz/Speicher/Savini.

RESULTS

The lowest mean absolute errors (MAEs) in IOL power prediction in Group 1 (n = 12) and Group 2 (n = 11), respectively, were with the methods of Seitz/Speicher/Savini (0.51 diopter [D] +/- 0.44 [SD] and 0.55 +/- 0.50 D), Seitz/Speicher (0.58 +/- 0.47 D and 0.54 +/- 0.45 D), Savini (0.60 +/- 0.44 D and 0.65 +/- 0.63 D), Masket (0.82 +/- 0.49 D and 0.69 +/- 0.51 D), and Shammas (0.77 +/- 0.43 D and 1.11 +/- 0.50 D). In Group 3 (n = 5), the lowest MAEs were with the methods of Masket (0.23 +/- 0.27 D), Savini (0.49 +/- 0.86 D), Seitz/Speicher/Savini (0.68 +/- 0.36 D), Shammas (0.84 +/- 0.98 D), and Camellin/Calossi (0.91 +/- 0.84 D).

CONCLUSIONS

When corneal power is known, the Seitz/Speicher method (with or without Savini adjustment) seems the best solution to obtain an accurate IOL power prediction. Otherwise, the Masket method may be the most reliable option.

Comparison of intraocular lens power calculation formulae in pediatric eyes

PURPOSE

To evaluate accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulae (SRK II, SRK/T, Holladay 1, Hoffer Q) in pediatric eyes.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred thirty-five eyes of 96 children with congenital, developmental, or acquired cataracts who underwent uncomplicated cataract surgery and IOL implantation by a single surgeon over a 10-year period.

METHODS

Axial length (AL), keratometry (K), and manufacturer's A constant were employed in 4 common IOL power calculation formulae to predict the refractive outcome. Retinoscopy was measured at 4 to 8 weeks postoperatively and converted to spherical equivalent. For analysis, eyes were grouped by age at surgery, AL, and mean K.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We determined the prediction error (PE) = predicted refraction - actual refraction and the absolute PE = |predicted refraction - actual refraction|. The formula that gave the best prediction (minimum PE) was determined.

RESULTS

The mean age at surgery was 6.4 years. Mean absolute PE was 1.11 for the SRK II, 0.84 for SRK/T, 0.76 for Holladay, and 0.76 for Hoffer Q formulae. There was a trend toward greater PE in eyes of younger children (< or =2 years), shorter AL (AL < or = 22 mm) and steeper corneas (mean K > 43.5 diopters [D]). On comparing absolute PE obtained with 4 formulae in each patient, Hoffer Q gave the minimum PE in 46% of eyes compared with 23% with SRK II, 18.5% with SRK/T, and 12.5% with Holladay 1. The SRK/T, Holladay 1, and Hoffer Q were similar in accurately predicting refractive error within +/-0.5 D in about 43% eyes. When clinically significant deviation in PE occurred (>0.5 D), there was usually an undercorrection (72%), except for Hoffer Q, which was almost as likely to overcorrect as undercorrect (44% vs 56%). The PE was lower with office measurements when compared with anesthesia measurements, owing probably to better fixation in older children with higher ALs.

CONCLUSION

The PE was insignificant (PE < or = 0.5 D) in 43% eyes, and similar for all formulae. However, the Hoffer Q was predictable for the highest number of eyes. When the PE was >0.5 D, most formulae gave an undercorrection, except for the Hoffer Q, which the surgeon may want to consider when targeting postoperative refractions.