Intraocular lens power calculation after previous myopic laser vision correction based on corneal power measured by Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography

Comparison of intraocular lens power prediction by American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery formulas and Barrett True-K TK in eyes with prior laser refractive surgery

PURPOSE

To evaluate the prediction accuracy of various intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas on American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) calculator and Barrett True-K total keratometry (TK) in eyes with previous laser refractive surgery for myopia.

METHODS

This retrospective study included eyes with history of myopic laser refractive surgery, which have undergone clear or cataractous lens extraction by phacoemulsification followed by IOL implantation. Those who underwent uneventful crystalline lens extraction were included. Eyes with any complication of refractive surgery or those with eventful lens extraction procedure and those who were lost to follow-up were excluded. Formulas compared were Wang-Koch-Maloney, Shammas, Haigis-L, Barrett True-K no-history formula, ASCRS average power, ASCRS maximum power on the ASCRS post-refractive calculator and the IOLMaster 700 Barrett True-K TK. Prediction error was calculated as the difference between the implanted IOL power and the predicted power by various formulae available on ASCRS online calculator.

RESULTS

Forty post-myopic laser-refractive surgery eyes of 26 patients were included. Friedman's test revealed that Shammas formula, Barrett True-K, and ASCRS maximum power were significantly different from all other formulas (P < 0.00001 for each). Median absolute error (MedAE) was the least for Shammas and Barrett True-K TK formulas (0.28 [0.14, 0.36] and 0.28 [0.21, 0.39], respectively) and the highest for Wang-Koch-Maloney (1.29 [0.97, 1.61]). Shammas formula had the least variance (0.14), while Wang-Koch-Maloney formula had the maximum variance (2.66).

CONCLUSION

In post-myopic laser refractive surgery eyes, Shammas formula and Barrett True-K TK no-history formula on ASCRS calculator are more accurate in predicting IOL powers.

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.

An update on intraocular lens power calculations in eyes with previous laser refractive surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is an ever-growing body of research regarding intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations following photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK), and small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). This review intends to summarize recent data and offer updated recommendations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Postmyopic LASIK/PRK eyes have the best refractive outcomes when multiple methods are averaged, or when Barrett True-K is used. Posthyperopic LASIK/PRK eyes also seem to do best when Barrett True-K is used, but with more variable results. With both aforementioned methods, using measured total corneal power incrementally improves results. For post-SMILE eyes, the first nontheoretical data favors raytracing.

SUMMARY

Refractive outcomes after cataract surgery in eyes with prior laser refractive surgery are less accurate and more variable compared to virgin eyes. Surgeons may simplify their approach to IOL power calculations in postmyopic and posthyperopic LASIK/PRK by using Barrett True-K, and employing measured total corneal power when available. For post-SMILE eyes, ray tracing seems to work well, but lack of accessibility may hamper its adoption.

Comparison of intraocular lens power prediction accuracy of formulas in American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery post-refractive surgery calculator in eyes with prior radial keratotomy

Purpose

To evaluate the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power prediction of the formulas available on the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) post-refractive calculator in eyes with prior radial keratotomy (RK) for myopia.

Methods

This retrospective study included 25 eyes of 18 patients whose status was post-RK for treatment of myopia, which had undergone cataract extraction with IOL implantation. Prediction error was calculated as the difference between implanted IOL power and predicted power by various formulae available on ASCRS post-refractive calculator. The formulas compared were Humphrey Atlas method, IOLMaster/Lenstar method, Barrett True-K no-history formula, ASCRS Average power, and ASCRS Maximum power on ASCRS post-refractive calculator.

Results

Median absolute errors were the least for Barrett True-K and ASCRS Maximum power, that is, 0.56 (0.25, 1.04) and 0.56 (0.25, 1.06) D, respectively, and that of Atlas method was 1.60 (0.85, 2.28) D. Median arithmetic errors were positive for Atlas, Barrett True-K, ASCRS Average (0.86 [-0.17, 1.61], 0.14 [-0.22 to 0.54], and 0.23 [-0.054, 0.76] D, respectively) and negative for IOLMaster/Lenstar method and ASCRS Maximum power (-0.02 [-0.46 to 0.38] and - 0.48 [-1.06 to - 0.22] D, respectively). Multiple comparison analysis of Friedman's test revealed that Atlas formula was significantly different from IOLMaster/Lenstar, Barrett True-K, and ASCRS Maximum power; ASCRS Maximum power was significantly different from all others (P < 0.00001).

Conclusion

In post-RK eyes, Barrett True-K no-history formula and ASCRS Maximum power given by the ASCRS calculator were more accurate than other available formulas, with ASCRS Maximum leading to more myopic outcomes when compared to others.

Intraocular lens power calculations in eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery: Challenges, approaches, and outcomes

In eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery, difficulties in accurately determining corneal refractive power and in predicting the effective lens position create challenges in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations. There are three categories of methods proposed based on the use of historical data acquired prior to the corneal refractive surgery. The American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery postrefractive IOL calculator incorporates many commonly used methods. Accuracy of refractive prediction errors within ± 0.5 D is achieved in 0% to 85% of eyes with previous myopic LASIK/photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), 38.1% to 71.9% of eyes with prior hyperopic LASIK/PRK, and 29% to 87.5% of eyes with previous radial keratotomy. IOLs with negative spherical aberration (SA) may reduce the positive corneal SA induced by myopic correction, and IOLs with zero SA best match corneal SA in eyes with prior hyperopic correction. Toric, extended-depth-of-focus, and multifocal IOLs may provide excellent outcomes in selected cases that meet certain corneal topographic criteria. Further advances are needed to improve the accuracy of IOL power calculation in eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery.

Accuracy of Intraoperative Aberrometry, Barrett True-K With and Without Posterior Cornea Measurements, Shammas-PL, and Haigis-L Formulas After Myopic Refractive Surgery

PURPOSE

To assess the accuracy of intraoperative aberrometry, the Barrett True-K No History (Barrett TKNH), Barrett TKNH with posterior corneal measurements (Barrett TKNH with PC), Shammas-PL, and Haigis-L formulas in patients with cataract who had prior myopic refractive surgery.

METHODS

This was a retrospective consecutive case series of patients with prior myopic refractive surgery undergoing cataract extraction. Mean absolute error (MAE) and median absolute error (MedAE) of refraction prediction were compared for each formula. Interactions of each biometry measurement were modeled for each formula to evaluate those with the most significant impact on refraction prediction.

RESULTS

One hundred sixteen eyes of 79 patients were analyzed. MAE was 0.40 ± 0.33 diopters (D) for intraoperative aberrometry and 0.42 ± 0.31 D for the Barrett TKNH, 0.38 ± 0.30 D for the Barrett TKNH with PC, 0.47 ± 0.38 D for the Shammas-PL, and 0.56 ± 0.39 D for the Haigis-L formulas. Comparisons between formulas were significant for Barrett TKNH versus Barrett TKNH with PC formulas (P = .046), Barrett TKNH with PC versus Shammas-PL formulas (P = .023), and for all comparisons with the Haigis-L formula (P < .001), and not significant for all other comparisons (P > .05). Eyes were within ±0.50 D of prediction 73%, 72%, 69%, 62%, and 52% of the time for intraoperative aberrometry, the Barrett TKNH with PC, Barrett TKNH, Shammas-PL, and Haigis-L formulas, respectively. Corneal asphericity (Q value) was significantly associated with prediction error for all five methods. Changes in anterior chamber depth had a significant impact on Shammas-PL prediction errors.

CONCLUSIONS

Newer technology using information from the posterior cornea modestly improved outcomes when compared to established methods for intraocular lens selection in eyes that had previous laser refractive surgery for myopia. [J Refract Surg. 2021;37(1):60-68.].

Comparisons of intraocular lens power calculation methods for eyes with previous myopic laser refractive surgery: Bayesian network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the accuracy of the methods for calculation of intraocular lens (IOL) power in eyes with previous myopic laser refractive surgery.

SETTING

EENT Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, China.

DESIGN

Network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE and Cochrane Library from January 2000 to July 2019 was conducted for studies that evaluated methods of calculating IOL power in eyes with previous myopic laser refractive surgery. Outcomes measurements were the percentages of prediction error within ±0.50 diopters (D) and ±1.00 D of the target refraction (% ±0.50 D and % ±1.00 D). Traditional and network meta-analysis were conducted.

RESULTS

Nineteen prospective or retrospective clinical studies, including 1217 eyes and 13 calculation methods, were identified. A traditional meta-analysis showed that compared with the widely used Haigis-L method, the Barrett True-K formula, optical coherence tomography (OCT), and Masket methods showed significantly higher % ±0.50 D, whereas no difference was found in the % ±1.00 D. A network meta-analysis revealed that compared with the Haigis-L method, the OCT, Barrett True-K formula, and optiwave refractive analysis (ORA) methods performed better on the % ±0.50 D, whereas the Barrett True-K formula and ORA methods performed better on the % ±1.00 D. Based on the performances of both outcomes, the Barrett True-K formula, OCT, and ORA methods showed highest probability to rank the top 3 among the 13 methods.

CONCLUSIONS

The Barrett True-K formula, OCT, and ORA methods seemed to offer greater accuracy than others in calculating the IOL power for postrefractive surgery eyes.

Simulating Outcomes of Cataract Surgery: Important Advances in Ophthalmology

As the human eye ages, the crystalline lens stiffens (presbyopia) and opacifies (cataract), requiring its replacement with an artificial lens [intraocular lens (IOL)]. Cataract surgery is the most frequently performed surgical procedure in the world. The increase in IOL designs has not been paralleled in practice by a sophistication in IOL selection methods, which rely on limited anatomical measurements of the eye and the surgeon's interpretation of the patient's needs and expectations. We propose that the future of IOL selection will be guided by 3D quantitative imaging of the crystalline lens to map lens opacities, anticipate IOL position, and develop fully customized eye models for ray-tracing-based IOL selection. Conversely, visual simulators (in which IOL designs are programmed in active elements) allow patients to experience prospective vision before surgery and to make more informed decisions about which IOL to choose. Quantitative imaging and optical and visual simulations of postsurgery outcomes will allow optimal treatments to be selected for a patient undergoing modern cataract surgery.

Comparison of refractive outcomes using Scheimpflug Holladay equivalent keratometry or IOLMaster 700 keratometry for IOL power calculation

PURPOSE

This study aims to compare postoperative refractive error results using Pentacam (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH) Holladay equivalent keratometry readings (EKR) or IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) keratometry (K) values in IOL power calculation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 54 eyes of 31 patients who underwent cataract surgery. Preoperative biometric measurements of all patients were obtained using IOLMaster 700 followed by Pentacam measurements. IOLMaster 700 K measurements on horizontal (K1) and vertical (K2) axes and EKR measurements on 2 mm (EKR2mm), 3 mm (EKR3mm) and 4.5 mm (EKR4.5 mm) corneal zones were recorded. EKR4.5 mm value and IOLMaster 700 K values were used in Holladay-II, SRK/T, Haigis, and Hoffer-Q formulas to calculate predictive refractive error (PRE). Absolute refractive error (ARE) was calculated as the absolute difference between actual postoperative refractive error (APRE) and PRE values.

RESULTS

Mean age was 72.2 ± 8.3 (51-87) years and mean IOL power was 21.5 ± 2.9 D (18-23 D). There was no significant difference between PRE values when IOLMaster 700 K measurements and EKR4.5 mm K measurements were used in Holladay-II, SRK/T, Haigis, and Hoffer-Q formulas (p = 0.571, p = 0.833, p = 0.165, p = 0.347, respectively). There was no significant difference between APRE and ARE values (p = 0.124). According to mean ARE results, the closest estimate was achieved when the IOLMaster 700 K values were used in the Holladay-II formula (p = 0.271).

CONCLUSION

IOLMaster 700 K measurement and Pentacam EKR4.5 mm measurements can be used interchangeably. IOLMaster 700 K values yielded the most predictive measurement of the refractive result using the Holladay-II formula.

Diagnostic imaging versus surgical procedure: intra- and postoperative OCT evaluation of sutureless scleral-fixated intraocular lens implantation and possible related complications

Because the popularity of corneal refractive surgery has been increasing throughout the last 25 years, many authors have thought to apply optical coherence tomography (OCT) to the anterior segment (AS-OCT); by revising the instrumentation needed and slightly improve the technique, it has become an element of vital importance in order to ensure a complete and exhaustive pre- and postsurgical evaluation. Many applications of OCT have been recently developed—mostly in cataract surgery due to the increasing numbers—such as chamber biometry, which is used in a preoperative stage to determine the details of IOL implantation, and lens evaluation. The aim of this review is to assess the applications of anterior segment OCT in dislocated IOL and/or capsular bag exchange surgery with scleral sutureless fixated intraocular lens and monitoring of possible postoperative complications.

Comparative analysis of predictability and accuracy of American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery online calculator with Haigis-L formula in post-myopic laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis refractive surgery eyes

Purpose:

The aim of this study was to compare the predictability and accuracy of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) online calculator with the Haigis-L formula for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in post myopic laser-assisted in-situ keratomileuses (LASIK) eyes undergoing cataract surgery and also to analyze the postoperative refractive outcome among the ASCRS average, maximum and minimum values.

Methods:

A retrospective study was conducted on post myopic LASIK eyes which underwent cataract surgery between June 2017 and December 2019. IOL power was calculated using both Haigis-L & ASCRS methods. Implanted IOL power was based on the ASCRS method. The expected postoperative refraction for IOL power based on the Haigis-L formula was calculated and compared with the Spherical Equivalent (SE) obtained from the patient's actual refraction. Prediction error (PE) & Mean Absolute Error (MAE) was calculated. Intragroup analysis of ASCRS values was done.

Results:

Among the 41 eyes analyzed, pre-operative and post-operative mean best-corrected visual acuity was 0.58 ± 0.21 and 0.15 ± 0.26 logMAR, respectively. In the ASCRS method, 36 (87.8%) and 40 (97.6%) eyes had PE within ± 0.5D and ± 1.0 D, respectively, whereas, in the Haigis-L method, 29 (70.7%) eyes, and 38 (92.7%) eyes had PE within ± 0.5D and ± 1.0 D, respectively. Among the ASCRS subgroups, ASCRS average, maximum and minimum values had 83%, 80.6%, and 48.8% eyes with SE within ± 0.5D, respectively.

Conclusion:

ASCRS method can be considered as an equally efficient method of IOL power calculation as the Haigis-L method in eyes which have undergone post myopic LASIK refractive surgery. ASCRS maximum & average values gave better emmetropic results.

Accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation formulae after laser refractive surgery in myopic eyes: a meta-analysis

Background

To compare the accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation formulae after laser refractive surgery in myopic eyes.

Methods

We searched the databases on PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane library to select relevant studies published between Jan 1st, 2009 and Aug 11th, 2019. Primary outcomes were the percentages of refractive prediction error within ±0.5 D and ±1.0 D.

Results

The final meta-analysis included 16 studies using seven common methods (ASCRS average, Barrett True-K no history, Double-K SRK/T, Haigis-L, OCT formula, Shammas-PL, and Wang-Koch-Maloney). ASCRS average yielded significantly higher percentage of refractive prediction error within ±0.5 D than Haigis-L, Shammas-PL and Wang-Koch-Maloney (P = 0.009, 0.01, 0.008, respectively). Barrett True-K no history also yielded significantly higher percentage of refractive prediction error within ±0.5 D than Shammas-PL and Wang-Koch-Maloney (P = 0.01, P < 0.0001, respectively), and a similar result was found when comparing OCT formula with Haigis-L and Shammas-PL (P = 0.03, P = 0.01, respectively).

Conclusion

The ASCRS average or Barrett True-K no history should be used to calculate the intraocular lens power in eyes after myopic laser refractive surgery. The OCT formula if available, can also be a good alternative choice.

Preoperative biometric measurements with anterior segment optical coherence tomography and prediction of postoperative intraocular lens position

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the biometric parameters of crystalline lens components and to find effective factors for predicting postoperative intraocular lens (IOL) position. This retrospective study included 97 eyes from 97 patients with a mean age of 63.00 ± 12.38 (SD) years. The biometric measurements were performed by means of a 3-dimensional optical coherence tomography (3D-OCT) device. Specifically, anterior chamber depth (ACD), aqueous depth (AD), lens thickness (LT), lens meridian parameter (LMP), white-to-white diameters (WTW), anterior segment length (ASL), the anterior part of lens (aLT), and the posterior part of lens (pLT) were measured. Additionally, axial length (AL) and corneal radius (CR) were measured by the partial coherence interferometry. Ninety-seven eyes were divided into thin lens group (LT < 4.5 mm) and thick lens group (LT ≥ 4.5 mm). The differences between the above two groups were also analyzed. Postoperative IOL position was measured by 3D-OCT at 3 months postoperatively and regression formulas for predicting postoperative IOL position were developed by various combinations of preoperative factors. As lens thickened, ACD and AD became shallow (all P < .001). AD, ACD, ASL, aLT, and pLT showed statistically significant differences between two subgroups classified on the basis of LT (all P < .001). Meanwhile, the value obtained by subtracting aLT from pLT did not show any association with the other biometric measurements. The combination of ACD, aLT, pLT, AL, CR, and WTW showed the highest correlation with postoperative IOL position (R = 0.536, P < .001). In conclusion, pLT-aLT was an independent factor not affected by any other variables and did not show significant difference between thin lens group and thick lens group. The subdivision of the lens structure using 3D-OCT helps to predict postoperative IOL position.

Comparison of refractive outcomes using conventional keratometry or total keratometry for IOL power calculation in cataract surgery

PURPOSE

To compare the refractive outcomes following cataract surgery using conventional keratometry (K) and total keratometry (TK) for intraocular lens (IOL) calculation in the SRK/T, HofferQ, Haigis, and Holladay 1 and 2, as well as Barrett and Barrett TK Universal II formulas.

METHODS

Sixty eyes of 60 patients from Siriraj Hospital, Thailand, were prospectively enrolled in this comparative study. Eyes were assessed using a swept-source optical biometer (IOLMaster 700; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). Posterior keratometry, K, TK, central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth, lens thickness, axial length, and white-to-white corneal diameter were recorded. Emmetropic IOL power was calculated using K and TK in all formulas. Selected IOL power and predicted refractive outcomes were recorded. Postoperative manifest refraction was measured 3 months postoperatively. Mean absolute errors (MAEs), median absolute errors (MedAEs), and percentage of eyes within ± 0.25, ± 0.50, and ± 1.00 D of predicted refraction were calculated for all formulas in both groups.

RESULTS

Mean difference between K and TK was 0.03 D (44.56 ± 1.18 vs. 44.59 ± 1.22 D), showing excellent agreement (ICC = 0.99, all p < 0.001). Emmetropic IOL powers in all formulas for both groups were very similar, with a trend toward lower MAEs and MedAEs for TK when compared with K. The Barrett TK Universal II formula demonstrated the lowest MAEs. Proportion of eyes within ± 0.25, ± 0.50, and ± 1.00 D of predicted refraction were slightly higher in the TK group.

CONCLUSIONS

Conventional K and TK for IOL calculation showed strong agreement with a trend toward better refractive outcomes using TK. The same IOL constant can be used for both K and TK.

Evaluation of total keratometry and its accuracy for intraocular lens power calculation in eyes after corneal refractive surgery

PURPOSE

To compare the accuracy of total keratometry (TK) and standard keratometry (K) from a swept-source optical coherence tomography biometer for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery.

SETTING

Cullen Eye Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

The differences between the TK and K and their association with K were assessed. For IOL power calculation, combinations of 1) K with Haigis, Haigis-L, and Barrett True-K, and 2) TK with Haigis (Haigis-TK) were used. The mean absolute error (MAE) and the percentages of eyes within prediction errors of ± 0.50 diopters (D), ± 1.00 D, and ± 2.00 D were calculated.

RESULTS

The study comprised 129 eyes. For Haigis, Haigis-L, Barrett True-K, and Haigis-TK, respectively, the MAEs were 0.72 D, 0.61 D, 0.54 D, and 0.50 D in the myopic laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK)/photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) group, and 0.74 D, 0.68 D, 0.71 D, and 0.70 D in hyperopic LASIK/PRK group. For the radial keratotomy (RK) eyes, the MAEs were 0.66 D, 0.71 D, and 0.72 D for the Haigis, Barrett True-K, and Haigis-TK formulas, respectively. In the myopic LASIK/PRK group, the Barrett True-K and Haigis-TK produced significantly lower MAEs than did Haigis (P < .05). In the hyperopic LASIK/PRK and RK groups, there were no significant differences between the formulas in MAEs and percentages of eyes within the above prediction errors.

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of the combination of Haigis and TK in refractive prediction was comparable with Haigis-L and Barrett True-K in eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery.

Improving accuracy of corneal power measurement with partial coherence interferometry after corneal refractive surgery using a multivariate polynomial approach

Background

To improve accuracy of IOLMaster (Carl Zeiss, Jena, Germany) in corneal power measurement after myopic excimer corneal refractive surgery (MECRS) using multivariate polynomial analysis (MPA).

Methods

One eye of each of 403 patients (mean age 31.53 ± 8.47 years) was subjected to MECRS for a myopic defect, measured as spherical equivalent, ranging from − 9.50 to − 1 D (mean − 4.55 ± 2.20 D). Each patient underwent a complete eye examination and IOLMaster scan before surgery and at 1, 3 and 6 months follow up. Axial length (AL), flatter keratometry value (K1), steeper keratometry value (K2), mean keratometry value (KM) and anterior chamber depth measured from the corneal endothelium to the anterior surface of the lens (ACD) were used in a MPA to devise a method to improve accuracy of KM measurements.

Results

Using AL, K1, K2 and ACD measured after surgery in polynomial degree 2 analysis, mean error of corneal power evaluation after MECRS was + 0.16 ± 0.19 D.

Conclusions

MPA was found to be an effective tool in devising a method to improve precision in corneal power evaluation in eyes previously subjected to MECRS, according to our results.

Intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery

Background

This review aims to explain the reasons why intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation is challenging in eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery and what solutions are currently available to obtain more accurate results.

Review

After IOL implantation in eyes with previous LASIK, PRK or RK, a refractive surprise can occur because i) the altered ratio between the anterior and posterior corneal surface makes the keratometric index invalid; ii) the corneal curvature radius is measured out of the optical zone; and iii) the effective lens position is erroneously predicted if such a prediction is based on the post-refractive surgery corneal curvature. Different methods are currently available to obtain the best refractive outcomes in these eyes, even when the perioperative data (i.e. preoperative corneal power and surgically induced refractive change) are not known. In this review, we describe the most accurate methods based on our clinical studies.

Conclusions

IOL power calculation after myopic corneal refractive surgery can be calculated with a variety of methods that lead to relatively accurate outcomes, with 60 to 70% of eyes showing a prediction error within 0.50 diopters.

Anterior segment optical coherence tomography for evaluation of cornea and ocular surface

Current corneal assessment technologies make the process of corneal evaluation extremely fast and simple. Several devices and technologies allow to explore and manage patients better. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) technology has evolved over the years, and hence a detailed evaluation of anterior segment (AS) structures such as cornea, conjunctiva, tear meniscus, anterior chamber, iris, and crystalline lens has been possible in a noncontact and safe procedure. The purpose of this special issue is to present and update in the evaluation of cornea and ocular surface, and this paper reviews a description of the AS-OCT, presenting the technology and common clinical uses of OCT in the management of diseases involving cornea and ocular surface to provide an updated information of the clinical recommendations of this technique in eye care practice.

Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Eyes After Laser In Situ Keratomileusis or Photorefractive Keratectomy for Myopia

Intraocular power calculation is challenging for patients who have previously undergone corneal refractive surgery. The sources of prediction errors for these eyes are well known; however, the numerous formulas and methods available for calculating intraocular lens power in these cases are eloquent testimony to the absence of a definitive solution. This review discusses some of the available methods for improving the accuracy for predicting the refractive outcome for these patients. It focuses mainly on the methods available on the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) online calculator and provides some practical guidelines for cataract surgeons who encounter these challenging cases.

Comparison of Newer IOL Power Calculation Methods for Eyes With Previous Radial Keratotomy

Purpose

To evaluate the accuracy of the optical coherence tomography–based (OCT formula) and Barrett True K (True K) intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas in eyes with previous radial keratotomy (RK).

Methods

In 95 eyes of 65 patients, using the actual refraction following cataract surgery as target refraction, the predicted IOL power for each method was calculated. The IOL prediction error (PE) was obtained by subtracting the predicted IOL power from the implanted IOL power. The arithmetic IOL PE and median refractive PE were calculated and compared.

Results

All formulas except the True K produced hyperopic IOL PEs at 1 month, which decreased at ≥4 months (all P < 0.05). For the double-K Holladay 1, OCT formula, True K, and average of these three formulas (Average), the median absolute refractive PEs were, respectively, 0.78 diopters (D), 0.74 D, 0.60 D, and 0.59 D at 1 month; 0.69 D, 0.77 D, 0.77 D, and 0.61 D at 2 to 3 months; and 0.34 D, 0.65 D, 0.69 D, and 0.46 D at ≥4 months. The Average produced significantly smaller refractive PE than did the double-K Holladay 1 at 1 month (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in refractive PEs among formulas at 4 months.

Conclusions

The OCT formula and True K were comparable to the double-K Holladay 1 method on the ASCRS (American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery) calculator. The Average IOL power on the ASCRS calculator may be considered when selecting the IOL power. Further improvements in the accuracy of IOL power calculation in RK eyes are desirable.

Prediction of Postoperative Intraocular Lens Position with Angle-to-Angle Depth Using Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography

PURPOSE

To evaluate the accuracy of a new formula for predicting postoperative anterior chamber depth (ACD) with preoperative angle-to-angle (ATA) depth using anterior segment (AS) optical coherence tomography (OCT) and to compare it with established methods.

DESIGN

Retrospective consecutive case series.

PARTICIPANTS

Three hundred four eyes (276 patients) implanted with acrylic intraocular lenses (IOLs) were divided randomly into a training set (152 eyes) and a validation set (152 eyes).

METHODS

Based on the training set data, the postoperative ACD measured 1 month after surgery was analyzed via multiple linear regression analysis with 5 preoperatively measured variables: ATA depth, ATA width, preoperative ACD measured with AS OCT, axial length (AL), and corneal power. A new regression formula for predicting postoperative ACD was developed using the results of the stepwise analysis. In the validation set data, the coefficients of determination (R²) between the measured postoperative ACD and the predicted postoperative ACD obtained using the new formula were compared with those obtained using the Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff theoretic (SRK/T) and Haigis formulas. The absolute prediction errors were compared with each formula.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Postoperative ACD, median absolute prediction error of postoperative ACD, and ocular biometric parameters.

RESULTS

In the training set, ATA depth yielded the highest standard partial regression coefficient value, indicating that ATA depth is the most effective parameter for predicting postoperative ACD. The new regression formula was developed with 3 variables; ATA depth, preoperative ACD, and AL. In the validation set, the postoperative ACDs of the new formula, the SRK/T formula, and Haigis formula were predicted with R² of 0.71, 0.36, and 0.55, respectively, and the medians of the absolute prediction errors were 0.10 mm, 0.65 mm, and 0.30 mm, respectively. The absolute prediction error with the new formula was significantly smaller than those obtained with the SRK/T and Haigis formulas (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The new formula with 3 preoperative parameters-ATA depth, preoperative ACD, and AL-predicted postoperative ACD more accurately than the SRK/T and Haigis formulas. It may be possible to improve the accuracy of IOL power calculation using an improved postoperative ACD prediction with the ATA depth measured by AS OCT.

Intraocular lens calculations after laser vision correction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article describes different strategies for corneal measurements and/or intraocular lens (IOL) calculations and proposes a systematic approach for IOL selection in patients who have undergone laser corneal refractive surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Corneal measurements and IOL calculations cannot be obtained accurately with the standard measuring technologies and formulas in patients with history of laser corneal refractive surgery; therefore a variety of methods and formulas, some of which required prerefractive surgery data, have been proposed to improve the accuracy of measurements and calculations. Formulas that do not rely on prerefractive data seem to be as accurate as those that do; therefore the lack of prerefractive data no longer presents an obstacle for accurate IOL selection in these patients.

SUMMARY

Postrefractive patients undergoing cataract extraction and IOL implantation should have corneal measurements and IOL calculations that take into account and compensate for the limitations in accurate measurements and calculations. IOL selection should also aim to compensate for induced spherical aberration according to the ablation pattern.

Applications of Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography in Cornea and Ocular Surface Diseases

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a noncontact technology that produces high-resolution cross-sectional images of ocular tissues. Anterior segment OCT (AS-OCT) enables the precise visualization of anterior segment structure; thus, it can be used in various corneal and ocular surface disorders. In this review, the authors will discuss the application of AS-OCT for diagnosis and management of various corneal and ocular surface disorders. Use of AS-OCT for anterior segment surgery and postoperative management will also be discussed. In addition, application of the device for research using human data and animal models will be introduced.

Comparison of Newer Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Methods for Eyes after Corneal Refractive Surgery

PURPOSE

To compare the newer formulae, the optical coherence tomography (OCT)-based intraocular lens (IOL) power formula (OCT formula) and the Barrett True-K formula (True-K), with the methods on the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) calculator in eyes with previous myopic LASIK/photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

DESIGN

Prospective case series.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 104 eyes of 80 patients who had previous myopic LASIK/PRK and subsequent cataract surgery and IOL implantation.

METHODS

By using the actual refraction after cataract surgery as target refraction, predicted IOL power for each method was calculated. The IOL prediction error (PE) was obtained by subtracting the predicted IOL power from the power of the IOL implanted.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Arithmetic IOL PEs, variances of mean arithmetic IOL PE, median refractive PE, and percent of eyes within 0.5 diopters (D) and 1.0 D of refractive PE.

RESULTS

Optical coherence tomography produced smaller variance of IOL PE than did Wang-Koch-Maloney (WKM) and Shammas (P < 0.05). With the OCT, True-K No History, WKM, Shammas, Haigis-L, and Average of these 5 formulas, the median refractive PEs were 0.35 D, 0.42 D, 0.51 D, 0.48 D, 0.39 D, and 0.35 D, respectively, the percentage of eyes within 0.5 D of refractive PE were 68.3%, 58.7%, 50.0%, 52.9%, 55.8%, and 67.3%, respectively, and the percentage of eyes within 1.0 D of refractive PE were 92.3%, 90.4%, 86.9%, 88.5%, 90.4%, and 94.2%, respectively. The OCT formula had smaller refractive PE compared with the WKM and Shammas, and the Average approach produced significantly smaller refractive PE than all methods except OCT (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The OCT and True-K No History are promising formulas. The ASCRS IOL calculator has been updated to include the OCT and Barrett True K formulas.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Intraocular Lens Power Calculation After Laser Refractive Surgery Based on Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT IOL); Identifier: NCT00532051; www.ClinicalTrials.gov.

Demographics of patients having cataract surgery after laser in situ keratomileusis

PURPOSE

To retrospectively assess the demographics of patients having cataract surgery in eyes with previous laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, Kitasato University, Kanagawa, and Sanno Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

This study evaluated eyes of consecutive patients scheduled for cataract surgery after previous LASIK (Group 1). The control groups comprised eyes with axial lengths (ALs) matched with ALS in Group 1 (Group 2) and all eyes scheduled for cataract surgery (Group 3). Assessed were age, sex, corrected distance visual acuity, manifest refraction, keratometry (K) readings, corneal astigmatism, and corneal higher-order aberrations (HOAs).

RESULTS

Group 1 comprised 40 eyes of 40 patients; Group 2, 606 eyes of 606 patients; and Group 3, 3642 eyes of 3642 patients. The mean age at cataract surgery of patients in Group 1 was 54.6 years ± 8.1 (SD), which was significantly younger than in Group 2 (by approximately 10 years) and Group 3 (by approximately 15 years) (P < .001, Student t test). In Group 1, 70.0% of patients were men, a significantly higher percentage than in Groups 2 and 3 (P < .05, Fisher exact test). The rate of corneal HOAs was significantly higher in Group 1 than in Groups 2 and 3 (P < .05, Student t test). There were no significant differences in other demographics except in K readings.

CONCLUSION

A long AL and an increase in corneal HOAs might contribute to a tendency for cataract surgery to be performed earlier in eyes in which LASIK has been performed.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

Corneal Power Measurement Obtained by Fourier-Domain Optical Coherence Tomography: Repeatability, Reproducibility, and Comparison With Scheimpflug and Automated Keratometry Measurements

PURPOSE

To assess the repeatability and reproducibility of corneal power values obtained by a Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT) system (RTVue) and to compare them with the values obtained by a Scheimpflug camera system (Pentacam HR) and by automated keratometry (IOL Master).

METHODS

Thirty-two eyes from 32 healthy subjects were included in this prospective study. Two experienced observers measured each eye 3 consecutive times with the Pentacam, IOLMaster, and RTVue centered on either the pupil or corneal vertex. The conventional keratometry equivalent (CKE) and anterior (Ka), posterior (Kp), and net (Kn) corneal power values were determined.

RESULTS

The corneal power values obtained by the RTVue showed high repeatability (all intraclass correlation coefficient >0.96) and reproducibility (coefficient of variation <1.0%). Pupil-centered FD-OCT performed slightly better than corneal vertex-centered FD-OCT. Mean corneal values had higher reproducibly than any of the individual values. CKE, Ka, Kp, and Kn obtained by FD-OCT were 0.62 to 0.68 diopters (D), 0.70 to 0.76 D, 0.11 to 0.13 D, and 0.93 to 0.94 D higher than those obtained by the Pentacam HR, respectively. CKE and Ka obtained with the RTVue were also 0.60 to 0.74 D higher than those obtained with the IOLMaster, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The corneal power measurements obtained by the RTVue FD-OCT system showed high repeatability and reproducibility. Measurements obtained by FD-OCT with pupil centration were more reproducible than those obtained by FD-OCT with corneal vertex centration. We recommend that pupil-centered FD-OCT be used in clinical applications. Neither RTVue versus Pentacam HR nor RTVue versus IOLMaster can be used interchangeably.

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.

Keratometric index obtained by Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography

PURPOSE

To determine the keratometric indices calculated based on parameters obtained by Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT).

METHODS

The ratio of anterior corneal curvature to posterior corneal curvature (Ratio) and keratometric index (N) were calculated within central 3 mm zone with the RTVue FD-OCT (RTVue, Optovue, Inc.) in 186 untreated eyes, 60 post-LASIK/PRK eyes, and 39 keratoconus eyes. The total corneal powers were calculated using different keratometric indices: Kcal based on the mean calculated keratometric index, K1.3315 calculated by the keratometric index of 1.3315, and K1.3375 calculated by the keratometric index of 1.3375. In addition, the total corneal powers based on Gaussian optics formula (Kactual) were calculated.

RESULTS

The means for Ratio in untreated controls, post-LASIK/PRK group and keratoconus group were 1.176 ± 0.022 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.172-1.179), 1.314 ± 0.042 (95%CI, 1.303-1.325) and 1.229 ± 0.118 (95%CI, 1.191-1.267), respectively. And the mean calculated keratometric index in untreated controls, post-LASIK/PRK group and keratoconus group were 1.3299 ± 0.00085 (95%CI, 1.3272-1.3308), 1.3242 ± 0.00171 (95%CI, 1.3238-1.3246) and 1.3277 ± 0.0046 (95%CI, 1.3263-1.3292), respectively. All the parameters were normally distributed. The differences between Kcal and Kactual, K1.3315 and Kactual, and K1.3375 and Kactual were 0.00 ± 0.11 D, 0.21 ± 0.11 D and 0.99 ± 0.12 D, respectively, in untreated controls; -0.01 ± 0.20 D, 0.85 ± 0.18 D and 1.56 ± 0.16 D, respectively, in post-LASIK/PRK group; and 0.03 ± 0.67 D, 0.56 ± 0.70 D and 1.40 ± 0.76 D, respectively, in keratoconus group.

CONCLUSION

The calculated keratometric index is negatively related to the ratio of anterior corneal curvature to posterior corneal curvature in untreated, post-LASIK/PRK, and keratoconus eyes, respectively. Using the calculated keratometric index may improve the prediction accuracies of total corneal powers in untreated controls, but not in post-LASIK/PRK and keratoconus eyes.

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.

New Scheimpflug camera device in measuring corneal power changes after myopic laser refractive surgery

PURPOSE

To assess the accuracy of a combined Scheimpflug camera-Placido disk device (Sirius, CSO, Italy) in evaluating corneal power changes after myopic photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

METHODS

Two hundred and thirty-seven eyes of 237 patients that underwent myopic PRK with a refractive error, measured as spherical equivalent, ranging from -10.75 D to -0.5D (mean -4.63 ± 2.21D), were enrolled in this study. Corneal power evaluation using Sirius were performed before, 1, 3 and 6 months after myopic PRK. Mean simulated keratometry (SimK) and mean pupil power (MPP) were measured. Correlations between changes in corneal power, measured with SimK and MPP, and variations in subjective refraction, calculated at corneal plane, were evaluated using Pearson test at every follow up; differences between preoperative and postoperative data were evaluated with the Student paired t-test.

RESULTS

A good correlation has been detected between the variations in subjective refraction measured at corneal plane 1, 3 and 6 months after myopic PRK and both SimK (R(2) = 0.8463; R(2) = 0.8643; R(2) = 0.7102, respectively) and MPP (R(2) = 0.6622; R(2) = 0.5561; R(2) = 0.5522, respectively) but corneal power changes are statistically undervalued for both parameters (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Even if our data should be confirmed in further studies, SimK and MPP provided by this new device do not seem to accurately reflect the changes in corneal power after myopic PRK.

Intraocular lens power calculation by ray-tracing after myopic excimer laser surgery

PURPOSE

To investigate the refractive outcomes of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation by ray-tracing after myopic excimer laser surgery.

DESIGN

Prospective, interventional case series.

METHODS

setting: Multicenter study. participants: Twenty-one eyes of 21 patients undergoing phacoemulsification and IOL implantation after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis or photorefractive keratectomy were enrolled. intervention: IOL power calculation was performed using internal software of a Scheimpflug camera combined with a Placido disc corneal topographer (Sirius; CSO). Exact ray-tracing was carried out after the axial length (measured either by immersion ultrasound biometry or partial coherence interferometry), target refraction, and pupil size had been entered. main outcome measures: Median absolute error, mean absolute error, and mean arithmetic error in refraction prediction, that is, the difference between the expected refraction (as calculated by the software) and the actual refraction 1 month after surgery.

RESULTS

The mean postoperative refraction was -0.43 ± 1.08 diopters (D), with a range between -1.28 and 0.85 D. The mean arithmetic error was -0.13 ± 0.49 D. The median and mean absolute errors were +0.25 D and 0.36 D, respectively. Also, 71.4% of the eyes were within ± 0.50 D of the predicted refraction, 85.7% were within ± 1.00 D, and 100% within ± 1.50 D.

CONCLUSIONS

Ray-tracing can calculate IOL power accurately in eyes with prior myopic laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy, with no need for preoperative data.

Optical coherence tomography-based corneal power measurement and intraocular lens power calculation following laser vision correction (an American Ophthalmological Society thesis)

PURPOSE

To use optical coherence tomography (OCT) to measure corneal power and improve the selection of intraocular lens (IOL) power in cataract surgeries after laser vision correction.

METHODS

Patients with previous myopic laser vision corrections were enrolled in this prospective study from two eye centers. Corneal thickness and power were measured by Fourier-domain OCT. Axial length, anterior chamber depth, and automated keratometry were measured by a partial coherence interferometer. An OCT-based IOL formula was developed. The mean absolute error of the OCT-based formula in predicting postoperative refraction was compared to two regression-based IOL formulae for eyes with previous laser vision correction.

RESULTS

Forty-six eyes of 46 patients all had uncomplicated cataract surgery with monofocal IOL implantation. The mean arithmetic prediction error of postoperative refraction was 0.05 ± 0.65 diopter (D) for the OCT formula, 0.14 ± 0.83 D for the Haigis-L formula, and 0.24 ± 0.82 D for the no-history Shammas-PL formula. The mean absolute error was 0.50 D for OCT compared to a mean absolute error of 0.67 D for Haigis-L and 0.67 D for Shammas-PL. The adjusted mean absolute error (average prediction error removed) was 0.49 D for OCT, 0.65 D for Haigis-L (P=.031), and 0.62 D for Shammas-PL (P=.044). For OCT, 61% of the eyes were within 0.5 D of prediction error, whereas 46% were within 0.5 D for both Haigis-L and Shammas-PL (P=.034).

CONCLUSIONS

The predictive accuracy of OCT-based IOL power calculation was better than Haigis-L and Shammas-PL formulas in eyes after laser vision correction.

Updated practical intraocular lens power calculation after refractive surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Since its introduction in the 1980s, more than 40 million people worldwide have undergone some form of kerato-refractive surgery. Many of these individuals are now candidates for cataract surgery and pose the challenge of attaining first-rate refractive outcomes in nonvirgin eyes. Numerous approaches have been developed to estimate intraocular lens (IOL) power in eyes postrefractive surgery. This review highlights the most practical, relevant options for accurate IOL power determination in these cases.

RECENT FINDINGS

With refined techniques and advances in instrumentation, more accurate assessments of true corneal power and thus, IOL power, are possible in postrefractive eyes. Optical coherence tomography and other corneal tomography instruments have markedly improved accuracy in this process. However, when expensive, modern equipments are not readily available, and online IOL calculators such as the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) calculator have become efficient, reliable options. Recent evidence confirms the accuracy of these online calculators.

SUMMARY

Emerging literature supports the use of methods that do not rely on prior refractive data in IOL power determination. Online IOL calculators provide user-friendly, efficient options that greatly facilitate accurate IOL power determination for cataract surgery in eyes that have undergone prior kerato-refractive surgery.

Distributed scanning volumetric SDOCT for motion corrected corneal biometry

We present a method, termed distributed scanning OCT (DSOCT), which reduces the effects of patient motion on corneal biometry utilizing current-generation clinically available spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SDOCT) systems. We first performed a pilot study of the power spectrum of normal patient axial eye motion based on repeated (M-mode) SDOCT. Using DSOCT to reduce the effects of patient motion, we conducted a preliminary patient study comparing the measured anterior and posterior corneal curvatures and the calculated corneal power to both corneal topography and Scheimpflug photography in normal subjects. The repeatability for the measured radius of curvature of both anterior and posterior surfaces as well as calculated corneal refractive power using DSOCT was comparable to those of both topography and Scheimpflug photography.