Cataract surgery in patients with prior refractive surgery

Evaluation of Visual Outcomes in Patients With Aberrated Corneas Implanted With the IC-8 Small-Aperture IOL

PURPOSE

To assess the visual outcomes in patients with cataract implanted with a small-aperture intraocular lens (IOL) in eyes with aberrated corneas.

METHODS

This prospective, non-interventional, single-center clinical study was conducted at Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore. Twenty-one patients with aberrated corneas had IC-8 IOL (Bausch & Lomb, Inc) implantation. An aberrated cornea was defined as from natural causes: keratoconus (n = 1, 4.8%), high coma (n = 2, 9.5%), corneal scar (n = 1, 4.8%), or iatrogenic causes: keratorefractive procedure (n = 17, 86%). Uncorrected and corrected visual acuities were measured at distance (600 cm) (UDVA and CDVA), intermediate (66.7 cm) (UIVA and CIVA), and near (40 cm) (UNVA and CIVA). Defocus curve was tested monocularly and binocularly. Contrast sensitivity (CS) was measured under photopic and mesopic conditions with and without glare.

RESULTS

In IC-8 eyes, the mean ± standard deviation UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA was 0.24 ± 0.18, 0.19 ± 0.18, and 0.14 ± 0.14 logMAR, respectively. Mean CDVA, CIVA, and CNVA in IC-8 eyes was 0.12 ± 0.17, 0.16 ± 0.15, and 0.19 ± 0.13 logMAR, respectively. Binocular mean UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA was 0.07 ± 0.10, 0.07 ± 0.10, and 0.13 ± 0.12 logMAR, respectively. Defocus curve testing yielded a depth of focus of 1.50 D monocularly and 2.00 D binocularly at a 0.2 logMAR threshold. Photopic binocular CS with and without glare improved over monocular CS of IC-8 and fellow eyes under all spatial frequencies. Mesopic binocular CS with and without glare were similar among monocular IC-8 and fellow eyes across spatial frequencies. Most patients reported low levels of visual symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

The IC-8 IOL provides good monocular and binocular visual outcomes for patients with cataract who had aberrated corneas. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(10):e716-e723.].

Refractive outcomes using Barrett formulas and patient characteristics of cataract surgery patients with and without prior LASIK/PRK

PURPOSE

The goal of this study is to describe characteristics of cataract surgery patients who previously underwent laser in situ keratomileusis/photorefractive keratectomy (LASIK/PRK) in comparison to non-LASIK/PRK cataract surgery patients including psychiatric comorbidities, as well as describe refractive prediction error after cataract surgery while accounting for axial length (AL) using the Barrett True-K and Barrett Universal II formulas.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of patients from the University of Colorado Cataract Outcomes Registry. The primary outcomes were refraction prediction error (RPE), mean absolute RPE, and median absolute RPE. Outcomes were stratified by five axial length groups. Univariate and multivariate models for RPE were stratified by the AL group.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighty-one eyes with prior LASIK/PRK and 3101 eyes without are included in the study. Patients with prior LASIK/PRK were significantly younger: 67.0 vs 69.9 years, p < 0.0001. The LASIK/PRK group had significantly better mean pre-operative BCVA in comparison to the non-LASIK group, logMAR 0.204 vs logMAR 0.288, p = 0.003. The LASIK/PRK group had significantly lower rates of cardiovascular disease (18.5% vs 29.3%, p < 0.001), hypertension (49.1% vs 59.3%, p < 0.012), and type 2 diabetes (10.7% vs 26.0%, p < 0.001), and no significant difference in psychiatric disease. The absolute RPE was higher for the LASIK group for all ALs, but only significantly higher for eyes with AL less than 25 mm.

CONCLUSION

Patient eyes with prior LASIK/PRK surgery undergoing cataract surgery were significantly younger, had significantly less comorbidities, and a significantly better pre-operative BCVA. Using the Barrett formulas, absolute prediction error for eyes with longer ALs was not significantly worse for LASIK/PRK eyes than those without and the difference was smaller for eyes with longer AL.

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.

Cataract surgery following refractive surgery: Principles to achieve optical success and patient satisfaction

A growing number of patients with prior refractive surgery are now presenting for cataract surgery. Surgeons face a number of unique challenges in this patient population that tends to be highly motivated to retain or regain functional uncorrected acuity postoperatively. Primary challenges include recognition of the specific type of prior surgery, use of appropriate intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas, matching IOL style with spherical aberration profile, the recognition of corneal imaging patterns that are and are not compatible with toric and/or presbyopia-correcting lens implantation, and surgical technique modifications, which are particularly relevant in eyes with prior radial keratotomy or phakic IOL implantation. Despite advancements in IOL power formulae, corneal imaging, and IOL options that have improved our ability to achieve targeted postoperative refractive outcomes, accuracy and predictability remain inferior to eyes that undergo cataract surgery without a history of corneal refractive surgery. Thus, preoperative evaluation of patients who will and will not be candidates for postoperative refractive surgical enhancements is also paramount. We provide an overview of the specific challenges in this population and offer evidence-based strategies and considerations for optimizing surgical outcomes.

Comparative Analysis of Corneal Parameters Performed with GalileiG6 and OCT Casia 2

BACKGROUNDS

To compare keratometry (Ks and Kf), astigmatism (Ast.), and the astigmatism axes (Ax.) of the posterior surface of the cornea; the total, central cornea thickness (CCT); and the thinnest corneal thickness (TCT) measured using two different measurement methods.

METHODS

Patients qualified for cataract surgery at the Chair and Clinical Department of Ophthalmology, Division of Medical Science in Zabrze, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland, were included in the study and monitored with the following two devices: OCT-CASIA2 and Dual Scheimpflug Analyzer GalileiG6. Our work was a randomized, prospective study in which compliance with the agreement of measurements between the devices was evaluated using the Bland-Altman method.

RESULTS

A total of 110 patients (62 females and 48 males) were examined. Overall, 100 eyes of patients that qualified for cataract surgery were enrolled in the study. No statistically significant difference was observed for Total-Ks and Total-Kf. A significant difference was observable for the following parameters: total Ks-ax, total Kf-ax, the total power of astigmatism, and in all parameters of the part of the cornea and corneal thickness (CCT and TCT).

CONCLUSIONS

The measurements obtained using Casia2 and the Dual Scheimpflug Analyzer GalileiG6 were significantly different and not interchangeable except for total Ks and Kf.

Intraoperative aberrometry: an update on applications and outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is now a large body of experience with intraoperative aberrometry. This review aims to synthesize available data regarding intraoperative aberrometry applications and outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

The Optiwave Refractive Analysis (ORA) System utilizes Talbot-moiré interferometry and is the only commercially available intraoperative aberrometry device. There are few studies that include all-comers undergoing intraoperative aberrometry-assisted cataract surgery, as most studies examine routine patients only or atypical eyes only. In non-post-refractive cases, studies have consistently shown a small but statistically significant benefit in spherical equivalent refractive outcome for intraoperative aberrometry versus preoperative calculations. In studies examining axial length extremes, most studies have shown intraoperative aberrometry to perform similarly to preoperative calculations. Amongst post-refractive cases, post-myopic ablation cases appear to benefit the most from intraoperative aberrometry. For toric intraocular lenses (IOLs), intraoperative aberrometry may be used for refining IOL power (toricity and spherical equivalent) and alignment, and most studies show intraoperative aberrometry to achieve low postoperative residual astigmatism.

SUMMARY

Intraoperative aberrometry can be utilized as an adjunct to preoperative planning and surgeon's judgment to optimize cataract surgery refractive outcomes. Non-post-refractive cases, post-myopic ablation eyes, and toric intraocular lenses may have the greatest demonstrated benefit in intraoperative aberrometry studies to date, but other eyes may also benefit from intraoperative aberrometry use.

Outcomes of the Haigis-L formula for calculating intraocular lens power in extreme long axis eyes after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the accuracy of refractive prediction by the Haigis-L formula compared to four other IOL power calculation formulas in eyes with extremely long axial lengths (AL > 29.0 mm) after LASIK.

SETTING

Shanghai Eye Disease and Prevention Treatment Center, Shanghai, China.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

Twenty-nine eyes from 19 patients were available for analysis. The primary outcome measure was the arithmetic refractive prediction error (RPE), defined as the difference between the actual postoperative refractive error and the intended formula-derived refractive target. The main outcome measure was the median absolute refraction prediction error (MedAE). The accuracy of the Haigis-L was compared with Barrett True K No History, Shammas-PL, SRK/Tcorrected K, and Holladay 2corrected K methods to calculate IOL power.

RESULTS

The Haigis-L formula had a significantly larger MedAE than Shammas-PL and SRK/Tcorrected K formulas (P = 0.005 and P = 0.015, respectively), a smaller percentage of eyes within ±1.50 diopter (D) of predicted error in refraction compared with Shammas-PL and SRK/Tcorrected K formulas (P = 0.014 and P = 0.005, respectively). The refractive prediction errors of 6 eyes with corneal keratometry of less than 35 D by Haigis-L all had more than 1.95 D of myopic overestimation, while none of the other four methods resulted in an absolute error over 1.95 D.

CONCLUSIONS

The Haigis-L formula was relatively accurate in predicting extreme long axis (>29.0 mm) eyes after myopic LASIK surgery but less accurate for eyes with extremely flat corneas (<35 D). SRK/Tcorrected K and Shammas-PL performed better than the other methods for refractive prediction in this type of eyes.

SYNOPSIS

Haigis-L performed worse than SRK/Tcorrected K and Shammas-PL in predicting IOL power in extremely long axis (>29.0 mm) eyes after myopic LASIK, especially with extremely flat corneas (K < 35 D).

Presbyopia correction after previous Intracor treatment: Combined implantation of a small-aperture and a non-diffractive extended-depth-of-focus lens

PURPOSE

We present the case of implantation of two different Extended depth of focus intraocular lenses (EDoF IOLs) in a patient with a history of unilateral intrastromal femtosecond laser treatment for presbyopia correction (Intracor).

OBSERVATIONS

The patient reported decreasing visual acuity at near distance and increasing spectacle dependence. Ten years earlier, he had Intracor treatment for presbyopia correction in his left eye. Corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was 0.08 logMAR for the right eye and 0.16 logMAR for the left eye. Apart from dysfunctional lens syndrome, the examination results were unremarkable. Phacoemulsification and subsequent IOL implantation was performed in both eyes. The left eye was implanted with an IC-8 (AcuFocus, Irvine, CA, USA), whereas the fellow eye was implanted with an AcrySof IQ Vivity IOL (Alcon, Fort Worth, TX, USA). Postoperatively, CDVA improved to 0.02 and 0.04 logMAR for the right and left eye. Uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) was 0.24 logMAR for the right eye and -0.04 logMAR for the left eye, binocular UIVA was -0.04 logMAR. The patient reported a low level of photic phenomena and spectacle independence for far and intermediate distance.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPORTANCE

Combined implantation of a non-diffractive and a small-aperture EDoF lens after previous unilateral Intracor treatment could successfully improve visual acuity at far and intermediate distance.

Optimizing intraocular lens power calculation using adjusted conventional keratometry for cataract surgery combined with Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty

PURPOSE

To evaluate the utility of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation using adjusted conventional keratometry (K) according to postoperative posterior to preoperative anterior corneal curvature radii (PPPA) ratio for eyes with Fuch's dystrophy undergoing cataract surgery combined with Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (triple DMEK).

METHODS

A fictitious refractive index (FRI) was determined (Pentacam HR®) based on the PPPA ratio in 50 eyes undergoing triple DMEK. Adjusted corneal power was calculated in every eye using adjusted K values: K values determined by the IOLMaster were converted to adjusted anterior corneal radius using the mean FRI. Posterior corneal radius was calculated using the mean PPPA ratio. Adjusted corneal power was determined based on the calculated corneal radii and thick lens formula. Refractive errors calculated using the Haigis, SRK/T, and HofferQ formulae based on the adjusted corneal power were compared with those based on conventional K measurements.

RESULTS

Calculated PPPA ratio and FRI were 0.801 and 1.3271. Mean prediction error based on conventional K was in the hyperopic direction (Haigis: 0.84D; SRK/T: 0.74D; HofferQ: 0.74D) and significantly higher (P < 0.001) than that based on adjusted corneal power (0.18D, 0.22D, and 15D, respectively). When calculated according to adjusted corneal power, the percentage of eyes with a hyperopic shift > 0.5D fell significantly from 64 to 30% (Haigis), 62 to 36% (SRK/T), and 58 to 26% (HofferQ), respectively.

CONCLUSION

IOL power calculation based on adjusted corneal power can be used to reduce the risk of a hyperopic shift after triple DMEK and provides a more accurate refractive outcome than IOL power calculation using conventional K.

A Multicenter Study of the Distribution Pattern of Posterior-To-Anterior Corneal Curvature Radii Ratio in Chinese Myopic Patients

Estimation of corneal refractive power (CRP) is of crucial importance to refractive and cataract surgery. The ratio of posterior to anterior curvature radii of the cornea (P/A ratio) is one of the key factors to determine the actual CRP (True-K). While the traditional method to calculate the CRP (Sim-K) is based on a constant P/A ratio (0.82), it is suggested that the P/A ratio varies in different people and exhibits a distribution pattern, which may have an impact on the accuracy of CRP estimation and postoperative refractive outcome. In this multicenter study, we aimed to investigate the distribution pattern of the P/A ratio in a large number of myopic patients, and further explore the relationship between P/A ratio and ΔK (the difference between True-K and Sim-K). We found that distribution of the P/A ratio ranged from 0.72 to 0.86 with an average value of 0.82 ± 0.01. The compensation effect of the refractive power of the posterior on the anterior surface of the cornea decreased with the increase of P/A ratio. There was a significant correlation between P/A ratio and ΔK in all eyes (r = 0.9764, P &lt; 0.0001). A change of 0.1 in P/A ratio could cause a change of 0.75 D in ΔK. Our study suggests that the actual P/A ratio should be taken into consideration in refractive and cataract surgery when calculating the CRP and power of the intraocular lens in eyes with significantly deviated P/A ratios.

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.

Comparison of ocular biometric measurements in patients with cataract using three swept-source optical coherence tomography devices

BACKGROUND

Precise measurement of ocular biometry is critical for determining intraocular lens power. Newly developed swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) - based ocular biometric devices, ANTERION and CASIA2 provide ocular biometric measurements as IOLMaster 700. This study aimed to assess agreement between three devices.

METHODS

This retrospective comparative study includes patients with cataract who underwent ocular biometric measurements with three devices, ANTERION, CASIA2, and IOLMaster 700, at Seoul National University Hospital, in April 2020. Anterior keratometry, total keratometry, central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), and axial length (AL) were the main parameters for the comparison. To assess the agreement between the devices, intraclass coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) were used.

RESULTS

A total of 47 eyes of 29 patients were measured with three devices. Average anterior keratometry showed excellent agreement (ICC ≥ 0.989), and the mean difference was less than 0.1 D. However, the ICC of the total average keratometry ranged from 0.808 to 0.952, and the difference was more than 0.43 D. The AL measured by ANTERION and IOLMaster 700 showed excellent agreement (ICC = 0.999), and the mean difference was 0.005 mm. The ANTERION and IOLMaster 700 did not obtain AL in six (12.8%) and three (6.4%) cases, respectively (P = 0.001 by Fisher's exact test). The CCT, ACD, and LT also showed excellent agreement (ICC > 0.9).

CONCLUSIONS

The new SS-OCT-based devices, ANTERION, and CASIA2 showed a good agreement with IOLMaster 700 in measuring ocular biometry except for the total keratometry. The AL of ANTERION and IOLMaster 700 showed excellent agreement.

Corneal Topography for Intraocular Lens Selection in Refractive Cataract Surgery

The purpose of this review is to evaluate the usefulness of corneal topography to select premium intraocular lenses (IOLs), including aspherical IOLs, toric IOLs, and multifocal IOLs, in refractive cataract surgery. Corneal topography can detect corneal regular astigmatism, corneal irregular astigmatism (higher-order aberrations [HOAs]) including spherical aberration, and corneal shape abnormalities after corneal refractive surgery. Surgeons can explain to the patients with significant corneal HOAs about its effect on postoperative visual function before surgery. Multifocal IOLs should not be selected for such eyes. For eyes with abnormal corneal shape, appropriate IOL power calculation formulae can be applied. In the case of toric IOLs, regular astigmatism and corneal HOAs should be checked. Before implanting an aspheric IOL, it is ideal to confirm spherical aberration of the cornea is not below the normal range. Because corneal HOAs, abnormal corneal shape after corneal refractive surgery, corneal regular astigmatism, and corneal spherical aberration increase postoperative refractive errors and poor vision quality with premium IOLs, corneal topography before cataract surgery is helpful in screening patients who are not appropriate candidates for premium IOLs.

Retrospective comparative analysis of intraocular lens calculation formulas after hyperopic refractive surgery

Purpose

To compare the intraocular lens calculation formulas and evaluate postoperative refractive results of patients with previous hyperopic corneal refractive surgery.

Design

Retrospective, comparative, observational study.

Setting

Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Methods

Clinical charts and optical biometric data of 39 eyes from 24 consecutive patients diagnosed with previous hyperopic laser vision correction and cataract surgery were reviewed and analyzed. The Intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation using the Holladay 2 formula (Lenstar) and the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) Post-Refractive IOL Calculator (version 4.9, 2017) were compared to the actual manifest refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE) following cataract surgery. No pre-Lasik / PRK or post-Lasik / PRK information was used in any of the calculations. The IOL prediction error, the mean IOL prediction error, the median absolute refractive prediction error, and the percentages of eyes within ±0.50 diopter (D) and ±1.00 D of the predicted refraction were calculated.

Results

The Holladay 2 formula produced a mean arithmetic IOL prediction error significantly different from zero (P = 0.003). Surprisingly, the mean arithmetic IOL prediction errors generated by Shammas, Haigis-L and Barret True K No History formulas were not significantly different from zero (P = 0.14, P = 0.49, P = 0.81, respectively).There were no significant differences in the median absolute refractive prediction error or percentage of eyes within ± 0.50 D or ± 1.00 D of the predicted refraction between formulas or methods.

Conclusion

In eyes with previous hyperopic LASIK/PRK and no prior data, there were no significant differences in the accuracy of IOL power calculation between the Holladay 2 formula and the ASCRS Post-refractive IOL calculator.

Analysis of Optical Properties of Posterior Surface of Cornea in Patients after Anterior Radial Keratotomy

Taking into account the constant increase in patients with age-related cataracts after radial keratotomy, a careful analysis of both the optical and anatomical properties of the cornea with the examination of the posterior surface is of particular importance.

Aim. To analyze the optical properties of the posterior surface of the cornea in patients after anterior radial keratotomy. 

Materials and methods. An examination of 24 patients (48 eyes) with age-related cataracts of varying degrees of density, myopia and the presence of a previous anterior radial keratotomy or radial-tangential keratotomy in history. The average age of patients was 59.5 years (from 47 to 68), there were 19 women and 5 men.

Results. The radius of curvature of the anterior surface in patients after anterior radial keratotomy was 9.45 ± 0.91 mm on average along the meridians, which is significantly more in comparison with these indices in control patients – 7.70 ± 0.19 mm (p = 0.0001). The ratio of the radii of the posterior cornea curvature to the anterior radius on average along the meridians in patients after anterior radial keratotomy was 1.07 ± 0.70, and in control patients – 1.20 ± 0.02 (p = 0.0001). The keratometric index in patients after anterior radial keratotomy was 1.3538 ± 0.0239, and in the control group – 1.3372 ± 0.0003 (p = 0.23).

Conclusion. In patients after anterior radial keratotomy, keratometry of the posterior surface of the cornea is significantly higher than in the control. The ratio of the radius of curvature of the posterior cornea to the radius of curvature of the anterior cornea varies significantly after anterior radial keratotomy, which is due to a more pronounced flattening of the posterior cornea. The standard keratometric index (1.3375) is invalid for patients after anterior radial keratotomy and must be calculated individually for each patient when deciding on the operative treatment of cataracts.

Refractive outcomes following cataract surgery in patients who have had myopic laser vision correction

Objective

Prediction errors are increased among patients presenting for cataract surgery post laser vision correction (LVC) as biometric relationships are altered. We investigated the prediction errors of five formulae among these patients.

Methods and analysis

The intended refractive error was calculated as a sphero-cylinder and as a spherical equivalent for analysis. For determining the difference between the intended and postoperative refractive error, data were transformed into components of Long's formalism, before changing into sphero-cylinder notation. These differences in refractive errors were compared between the five formulae and to that of a control group using a Kruskal-Wallis test. An F-test was used to compare the variances of the difference distributions.

Results

22 eyes post LVC and 19 control eyes were included for analysis. Comparing both groups, there were significant differences in the postoperative refractive error (p=0.038). The differences between the intended and postoperative refractive error were greater in post LVC eyes than control eyes (p=0.012), irrespective of the calculation method for the intended refractive error (p<0.01). The mean difference between the intended and postoperative refractive error was relatively small, but its variance was significantly greater among post LVC eyes than control eyes (p<0.01). Among post LVC eyes, there were no significant differences between the mean intended target refraction and between the intended and postoperative refractive error using five biometry formulae (p=0.76).

Conclusion

Biometry calculations were less precise for patients who had LVC than patients without LVC. No particular biometry formula appears to be superior among patients post LVC.

Accuracy of Different Topographic Instruments in Calculating Corneal Power after Myopic Photorefractive Keratectomy

PURPOSE

To compare the corneal power measurements obtained using different topographic instruments after myopic photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

METHODS

Patients with myopia who were candidates for corneal refractive surgery were sequentially included. Pre-PRK and six months post-PRK corneal powers were measured using Javal manual keratometer, Orbscan II, Galilei, Tomey TMS4, and EyeSys 2000 topographers. Measured values were compared with those obtained using the clinical history method (CHM).

RESULTS

This study included 66 eyes of 33 patients. The lowest keratometric measurements were obtained using the Galilei topographer (42.98 ± 1.69 diopters, D) and the highest measurements were obtained using the Javal manual keratometer (43.96 ± 1.54 D) preoperatively. The same order was observed postoperatively. Effective refractive power (EffRP) measured using EyeSys was most similar to the values obtained using CHM (ICC, intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.951), followed by the total corneal power measured using the Galilei system (ICC = 0.943). The values obtained using the adjusted EffRP formula (EffRP - 0.015*Δ Refraction - 0.05) were more consistent with the values obtained using CHM (ICC = 0.954) compared to those obtained with the adjusted average central corneal power formula measured using the Tomey system (ICC = 0.919).

CONCLUSION

Post-PRK corneal powers measured using the adjusted EffRP formula were the most similar to values obtained using CHM.

Predictability of Sirius dual-scanning corneal tomography in the measurement of corneal power after photorefractive surgery

Determining an accurate central corneal power (K) measurement is crucial for calculating the intraocular lens power in patients who are undergoing cataract extraction. The ideal method for measuring K is to use a device that works independently of the refractive surgery information. The Scheimpflug camera system offers a promising means of measuring the true corneal power after keratorefractive surgery. In this study, we investigated the accuracy of this system in measuring central corneal power after photorefractive corneal surgery by comparing it to the theoretically derived central corneal power by history method. A total of 120 eyes of 65 (35 females and 30 males) patients were included in this study. The mean change of refraction at the spectacle plane was 3.75 D, whereas the mean change of refraction at the corneal plane was 3.37 D. Using the Sirius dual-scanning corneal tomography, the mean change in corneal power was 3.96 D. No significant differences were detected between the mean post-operative corneal power measured by the Sirius tomographer and the mean change in refraction at the corneal plane calculated clinically (P = 0.076) and the correlation was found to be high (0.913). This study suggests that Sirius dual-scanning corneal tomography offers high predictability when measuring the central 5 mm corneal power in patients who have had myopic corneal photorefractive surgery.

Accuracy of Scheimpflug Holladay equivalent keratometry readings after corneal refractive surgery in the absence of clinical history

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To identify the most accurate combination of Pentacam's equivalent keratometry readings (EKR) and intraocular lens power formula when the clinical history is unavailable.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 18 patients underwent cataract surgery after refractive surgery. The Pentacam 4.5- and 3.0-mm EKR were combined with the SRK II, SRK/T, Hoffer-Q, and Holladay I and II formulas.

RESULTS

The smallest deviation from the predicted value was achieved by combining the 4.5 EKR with the Holladay II formula (mean arithmetic deviation, -0.2 ± 0.4 dpt).

CONCLUSION

The 4.5-mm EKR + Holladay II formula can accurately calculate intraocular lens power in patients with previous refractive surgery.

Cataract surgery outcome in eyes with keratoconus

BACKGROUND

To review the refractive outcome of cataract surgery in eyes with keratoconus.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 64 consecutive patients (92 eyes) who underwent cataract surgery with implantation of a spherical intraocular lens (IOL). We recorded the method of refractive correction and the effect of the keratometry (K) on the biometry prediction error (BPE).

RESULTS

35 eyes had mild keratoconus (mean K<48 dioptres (D)), 40 had moderate keratoconus (mean K 48 D to 55 D) and 17 had severe keratoconus (mean K>55 D). Actual K values were used in all eyes with mild or moderate keratoconus with a target refraction of approximately -1.0 D in mild keratoconus and -1.5 D in moderate keratoconus that resulted in a mean BPE of 0.0 D and +0.3 D, respectively. The actual K values were used in eight of the 17 eyes with severe keratoconus with a mean target refraction of -5.4 D, which resulted in a mean BPE of +6.8 D. In the remaining nine eyes, a standard K value of 43.25 D was used with a mean target refraction of -1.8 D, which resulted in a mean BPE of +0.6 D.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the actual K values with a target of low myopia is a suitable option for spherical IOL selection for eyes with a mean K of ≤55 D. When there is severe keratoconus, the use of actual K values can result in a large hyperopic error and the use of standard K value in these eyes should be considered.

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.

A new central-peripheral corneal curvature method for intraocular lens power calculation after excimer laser refractive surgery

PURPOSE

To propose the central-peripheral (C-P) method, which requires no data history to calculate intraocular lens (IOL) powers for eyes that underwent laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), and compare the accuracy of the C-P method with other IOL formulas for eyes after LASIK.

METHODS

Sixteen patients with cataract (25 eyes) who underwent myopic LASIK were analysed retrospectively. The C-P method is a modified double-K method using the SRK/T formula, in which the estimated pre-LASIK keratometric power calculated from the post-LASIK peripheral anterior sagittal power (also called the axial power) is used for the Kpre in the double-K method using the SRK/T formula, and the post-LASIK anterior sagittal power is used for the Kpost. We compared the accuracy of the C-P method with other popular IOL calculation formulas for use in eyes after LASIK.

RESULTS

The median values of the arithmetic and absolute prediction errors with the C-P method were 0.11 diopter (D) (range, -1.67 to 1.97 D) and 0.55 D (range, 0.02-1.97 D), respectively. The prediction error using the C-P method was within ±0.5 D in 48% of eyes, within -1.0 to +0.5 D in 60% of eyes, and within ±1.0 D in 68% of eyes. The C-P method resulted in a significantly higher percentage of eyes within ±0.5 D than the BESSt formula, Shammas-PL formula, true net power method, double-K method using 43.5 D for Kpre, and Feiz-Mannis method.

CONCLUSION

The C-P method may be a good option for calculating IOL powers in eyes undergoing cataract surgery after LASIK when the preoperative LASIK data are unavailable.

Implantation of a multifocal toric intraocular lens with a surface-embedded near segment after repeated LASIK treatments

We report a 66-year-old patient who presented with increasing hyperopia, astigmatism, and presbyopia in both eyes 8 years after bilateral laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and LASIK enhancement in the left eye aiming for spectacle independence. Bilateral multifocal toric Lentis Mplus intraocular lenses (IOLs) with an embedded near segment and individually customized cylinder correction were implanted uneventfully following phacoemulsification. The Haigis-L formula after previous hyperopia correction was chosen for IOL power calculation and provided reliable results. Emmetropia was targeted and achieved. Three months postoperatively, the uncorrected distance visual acuity had increased from 0.40 logMAR to 0.10 logMAR in the right eye and from 0.20 logMAR to 0.00 logMAR in the left eye. The patient gained 6 lines of uncorrected near visual acuity: 0.20 logMAR in the right eye and 0.10 logMAR in the left eye. This case shows that customized premium IOL implantation can provide accurate results even in challenging cases.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

The International Vision Correction Research Centre, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany, has received research grants, lecture fees, and travel reimbursement from Oculentis GmbH.

Scheimpflug camera measurement of anterior and posterior corneal curvature in eyes with previous radial keratotomy

PURPOSE

To compare the anterior and posterior corneal curvature in eyes with previous radial keratotomy (RK) to normal unoperated eyes.

METHODS

In this retrospective observational case series, 29 eyes from 29 consecutive patients were analyzed and compared to a control group of 71 unoperated eyes. Corneal imaging was obtained by a rotating Scheimpflug camera (Pentacam, Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH). Anterior and posterior corneal curvature radii were measured at the 3-mm zone.

RESULTS

The mean anterior and posterior corneal radii were 9.54 ± 0.89 and 8.54 ± 1.01 mm, respectively, both values being significantly higher than in the control group (7.81 ± 0.28 and 6.40 ± 0.24 mm, respectively, P<.0001). The mean anterior-to-posterior corneal curvature ratio was 1.12 ± 0.07, a value significantly lower than in the control group (1.22 ± 0.03, P<.0001). Mean corneal flattening was more evident in the posterior (33.44%) than in the anterior (22.15%) corneal curvature. The mean keratometric index, as calculated with the Gullstrand equation for thick lenses, was 1.3319 ± 0.0026, a value significantly higher than in the control group (1.3281 ± 0.0011, P<.0001). Linear regression detected a significant and directly proportional relationship between the number of radial incisions and flattening of both corneal surfaces (P<.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

After RK, both corneal surfaces flatten but do not deform in parallel as commonly accepted, as shown by the fact that the anterior-to-posterior corneal curvature ratio decreases. This finding invalidates the standard keratometric index and thus has relevant implications for intraocular lens power calculation in RK eyes.

Intraocular lens power calculation after myopic and hyperopic laser vision correction using optical coherence tomography

PURPOSE

To use optical coherence tomography (OCT) to measure corneal power and calculate intraocular lens (IOL) power in cataract surgeries after myopic and hyperopic laser vision correction (LVC).

METHODS

Patients with previous LVC were enrolled in this prospective study at two centers (Doheny Eye Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA and Cullen Eye Institute, Houston, TX, USA). Corneal power was measured with a Fourier-domain OCT system. The intravisit repeatability of OCT corneal power measurement was evaluated by the pooled standard deviation of repeat scans. Axial length, anterior chamber depth, and automated keratometry were measured with the IOLMaster. An OCT-based IOL formula was developed. The mean absolute error (MAE) of refractive prediction for OCT-based IOL formula was calculated. The results were compared with the MAE for Haigis-L formula.

RESULTS

A total of 31 eyes of 24 subjects who had uncomplicated cataract surgery with monofocal IOL implantation were enrolled in the two sites. Twenty-two eyes of 16 subjects had previous myopic LVC that ranged from -12.46 D to -0.88 D. Nine eyes of 8 subjects had previous hyperopic LVC that ranged from 0.66 D to 5.52 D. The intravisit repeatability of OCT corneal power measurement was 0.24 D. For the myopic LVC group, the OCT formula had a MAE of 0.57 D compared to an MAE of 0.73 D for the Haigis-L formula (p = 0.19). For the hyperopic LVC group, the MAE for OCT and Haigis-L formula was 0.26 D and 0.54 D, respectively (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Corneal power can be precisely measured with OCT. The predictive accuracy of OCT-based IOL power calculation is equal to current standards for post-LVC eyes.

A comparison of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery post-myopic LASI K/PRK intraocular lens (IOL) calculator and the Ocular MD IOL calculator

Background

To compare the average values of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) and Ocular MD intraocular lens (IOL) calculators to assess their accuracy in predicting IOL power in patients with prior laser-in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) or photorefractive keratectomy.

Methods

In this retrospective study, data from 21 eyes with previous LASIK or photorefractive keratectomy for myopia and subsequent cataract surgery was used in an IOL calculator comparison. The predicted IOL powers of the Ocular MD SRK/T, Ocular MD Haigis, and ASCRS averages were compared. The Ocular MD average (composed of an average of Ocular MD SRK/T and Ocular MD Haigis) and the all calculator average (composed of an average of Ocular MD SRK/T, Ocular MD Haigis, and ASCRS) were also compared. Primary outcome measures were mean arithmetic and absolute IOL prediction error, variance in mean arithmetic IOL prediction error, and the percentage of eyes within ±0.50 and ±1.00 D.

Results

The Ocular MD SRK/T and Ocular MD Haigis averages produced mean arithmetic IOL prediction errors of 0.57 and −0.61 diopters (D), respectively, which were significantly larger than errors from the ASCRS, Ocular MD, and all calculator averages (0.11, −0.02, and 0.02 D, respectively, all P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the methods in absolute IOL prediction error, variance, or the percentage of eyes with outcomes within ±0.50 and ±1.00 D.

Conclusion

The ASCRS average was more accurate in predicting IOL power than the Ocular MD SRK/T and Ocular MD Haigis averages alone. Our methods using combinations of these averages which, when compared with the individual averages, showed a trend of decreased mean arithmetic IOL prediction error, mean absolute upper limit of IOL prediction error, and variance, while increasing the percentage of outcomes within ±0.50 D.

Intraocular lens power calculations after myopic laser refractive surgery: a comparison of methods in 173 eyes

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare published methods of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation after myopic laser refractive surgery in a large, multi-surgeon study.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 173 eyes of 117 patients who had uneventful LASIK (89) or photorefractive keratectomy (84) for myopia and subsequent cataract surgery.

METHODS

Data were collected from primary sources in patient charts. The Clinical History Method (vertex corrected to the corneal plane), the Aramberri Double-K, the Latkany Flat-K, the Feiz and Mannis, the R-Factor, the Corneal Bypass, the Masket (2006), the Haigis-L, and the Shammas.cd postrefractive adjustment methods were evaluated in conjunction with third- and fourth-generation optical vergence formulas, as appropriate. Intraocular lens power required for emmetropia was back-calculated using stable post-cataract surgery manifest refraction and implanted IOL power, and then formula accuracy was compared.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prediction error arithmetic mean ± standard deviation (SD), range (minimum and maximum), and percent within 0 to -1.0 diopters (D), ±0.5 D, ±1.0 D, and ±2.0 D relative to target refraction.

RESULTS

The top 5 corneal power adjustment techniques and formula combinations in terms of mean prediction errors, standard deviations, and minimizing hyperopic "refractive surprises" were the Masket with the Hoffer Q formula, the Shammas.cd with the Shammas-PL formula, the Haigis-L, the Clinical History Method with the Hoffer Q, and the Latkany Flat-K with the SRK/T with mean arithmetic prediction errors and standard deviations of -0.18±0.87 D, -0.10±1.02 D, -0.26±1.13 D, -0.27±1.04 D, and -0.37±0.91 D, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

By using these methods, 70% to 85% of eyes could achieve visual outcomes within 1.0 D of target refraction. The Shammas and the Haigis-L methods have the advantage of not requiring potentially inaccurate historical information.

An intraocular lens power calculation formula based on optical coherence tomography: a pilot study

PURPOSE

To develop an intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formula based on optical coherence tomography (OCT) that would not be biased by previous laser vision correction.

METHODS

Twenty-seven eyes of 27 cataract patients without prior laser vision correction who underwent phacoemulsification were included in the study. An optical coherence biometer (IOLMaster, Carl Zeiss Meditec) measured anterior corneal curvature and axial eye length. A high-speed (2000 Hz) anterior segment OCT prototype mapped corneal thickness and measured anterior chamber depth and crystalline lens thickness. Posterior corneal curvature was computed by combining IOLMaster keratometry with OCT corneal thickness mapping. A new IOL formula was developed based on these parameters. One month after phacoemulsification, the manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) was measured. The prediction error in postoperative MRSE of the OCT-based IOL formula was compared with that of three theoretic formulae: SRK/T, Hoffer Q, and Holladay II.

RESULTS

The mean prediction error in postoperative MRSE of the OCT-based formula was 0.04+/-0.44 diopters (D). The SRK/T was the best of the theoretic formulae, and its prediction error was -0.35+/-0.42 D. Twenty-one (78%) eyes were within 0.50 D using the OCT formula compared to 18 (67%) eyes using the SRK/T. No statistically significant differences were noted among the formulae.

CONCLUSIONS

For cataract patients without prior laser vision correction, the OCT-based IOL formula was as accurate as the current theoretic formulae. This new formula is based on direct OCT assessment of the posterior curvature and avoids the calculation errors inherent in conventional IOL formulae.

Calculation of intraocular lens power using Orbscan II quantitative area topography after corneal refractive surgery

PURPOSE

To present the prospective application of the Orbscan II central 2-mm total-mean corneal power obtained by quantitative area topography in intraocular lens (IOL) calculation after refractive surgery.

METHODS

Calculated and achieved refraction and the difference between them were studied in 77 eyes of 61 patients with previous radial keratotomy (RK), RK and additional surgeries, myopic LASIK, myopic photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), or hyperopic LASIK who underwent phacoemulsification without complications in 3 eye centers. All IOL calculations used the average from the central 2-mm Orbscan II total-mean power of maps centered on the pupil without the use of previous refractive data. Six IOL styles implanted within the bag were used.

RESULTS

Using the SRK-T formula, the overall calculated refraction was -0.64+/-0.93 diopters (D). The overall achieved spherical equivalent refraction (-0.52+/-0.79 D; range: -3.12 to 1.25 D; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.70/-0.34 D) was +/-0.50 D in 53% of eyes, +/-1.00 D in 78% of eyes, and +/-2.00 D in 99% of eyes. The overall difference between the calculated and achieved refraction (0.12+/-0.93 D, P=.27; range: -2.18 to 2.62 D; 95% CI: 0.09/0.33 D) was +/-0.50 D in 39% of eyes, +/-1.00 D in 77% of eyes, and +/-2.00 D in 96% of eyes. This difference was +/-1.00 D in 77% of eyes with RK (P=.70), 82% of eyes with myopic LASIK (P=.34), and 90% of eyes with myopic PRK (P=.96). In eyes with RK followed by LASIK, a trend toward undercorrection was noted (P=.03). In eyes with hyperopic LASIK, a trend toward overcorrection was noted (P=.005).

CONCLUSIONS

In eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery, IOL power calculation can be performed with reasonable accuracy using the Orbscan II central 2-mm total-mean power. This method had better outcomes in eyes with previous RK, myopic LASIK, and myopic PRK than in eyes with hyperopic LASIK or RK with LASIK.

Cataract surgery after refractive surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review recent contributions addressing the challenge of intraocular lens (IOL) calculation in patients undergoing cataract extraction following corneal refractive surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although several articles have provided excellent summaries of IOL selection in patients wherein prerefractive surgery data are available, numerous authors have recently described approaches to attempt more accurate IOL power calculations for patients who present with no reliable clinical information regarding their refractive history. Additionally, results have been reported using the Scheimpflug camera system to measure corneal power in an attempt to resolve the most important potential source of error for IOL determination in these patients.

SUMMARY

IOL selection in patients undergoing cataract surgery after corneal refractive surgery continues to be a challenging and complex issue despite numerous strategies and formulas described in the literature. Current focus seems to be directed toward approaches that do not require preoperative refractive surgery information. Due to the relative dearth of comparative clinical outcomes data, the optimal solution to this ongoing clinical problem has yet to be determined. Until such data are available, many cataract surgeons compare the results of multiple formulas to assist them in IOL selection for these patients.

Intraocular lens power calculation after corneal refractive surgery

Cataract surgery after corneal refractive surgery can be challenging for the ocular surgeon due to the difficulty with accurate intraocular lens (IOL) power determination and unexpected refractive surprises. As clinicians have done more work, a number of error sources have been determined. Furthermore, an increasing number of methods to avoid these refractive surprises have been proposed. The combination of this work has resulted in recommendations for the modification of standard IOL power calculations to improve outcomes. The following article includes a brief on, and by no means, inclusive, error sources and ways to compensate for them.