Estimation of the Central Corneal Power in Keratoconus: Theoretical and Clinical Assessment of the Error of the Keratometric Approach

Accuracy of intraocular lens power formulas in eyes with keratoconus: Multi-center study in Japan

PURPOSE

To assess the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power formulas, namely, SRK/T, Haigis, Barrett Universal II, Barrett True-K for keratoconus, Kane formula, and Kane formula for keratoconus, for cataract with keratoconus in Japanese eyes.

SETTING

Five surgical sites in Japan.

DESIGN

A retrospective case series.

METHODS

Eyes with keratoconus undergoing cataract surgery were included. Postoperative refraction was compared with the prediction by the formulas. Visual acuity, manifest spherical equivalent, prediction error (PE), and mean absolute errors (MAEs) were determined 1 month postoperatively. The PE within 0.50 diopter (D), 1.00 D, and 2.00 D were compared between IOL formulas. Subgroup analysis based on the steepest keratometry (stage 1, ≤ 48 D; stage 2, > 48 D and ≤ 53 D; and stage 3, > 53 D) was performed. The relationship between PE and preoperative biometric data were assessed.

RESULTS

Fifty eyes were included. The MAE of the Barrett True-K for keratoconus, Kane keratoconus, and Kane formulas were significantly lower than that of Haigis. A statistically significant difference in the prediction accuracy within ± 0.50 D was found between Kane keratoconus and Haigis. The prediction accuracy of the Barrett True-K for keratoconus, SRK/T, and Kane within ± 1.00 D was statistically significant compared with that of Haigis. In stage 3, the Barrett True-K for keratoconus had a significantly lower MAE than SRK/T and Haigis.

CONCLUSION

Keratoconus-specific formulas were more accurate than existing formulas in Japanese eyes. The Barrett True-K formula for keratoconus had higher prediction accuracy in severe keratoconus.

Differences Between Simulated Keratometry and Total Corneal Power in Eyes With Keratoconus and a Formula to Improve IOL Power Calculation Results

PURPOSE

To compare simulated keratometry (SimK) and total corneal power (TCP) in keratoconic eyes, to determine whether the differences are systematic and predictable and to evaluate an adjusted TCP-based formula for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation.

METHODS

In a consecutive series of keratoconic eyes, measurements of SimK, TCP, posterior keratometry, and anterior and posterior corneal asphericities (Q-values) were retrospectively collected. The difference between SimK and TCP was linearly correlated to the biometric parameters. In a separate sample of keratoconic eyes that had undergone cataract surgery, IOL power was calculated with the Barrett Universal II, Hoffer QST, Holladay 1, Kane, and SRK/T formulas using the SimK and an adjusted TCP power. The respective prediction errors were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 382 keratoconic eyes (271 patients) were enrolled. An increasing overestimation of SimK by TCP was detected from stage I to III, with a significant correlation between the SimK and TCP difference and SimK in the whole sample (P < .0001, r2 = 0.1322). Approximately 7% of cases presented an underestimation of SimK by TCP. IOL power calculation with the adjusted TCP improved outcomes, achieving a maximum of 80% of eyes with a prediction error within ±0.50 diopters with the Hoffer QST, Holladay 1, and Kane formulas.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, SimK overestimated TCP. Such a difference could not be predicted by any variable. The proposed TCP-adjustment formula (TCPadj = TCP + 0.56 diopters) in keratoconic eyes for IOL power calculation might be valuable for improving refractive outcomes. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(4):e253-e259.].

Prediction of total corneal power in keratoconus using anterior surface data

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Keratoconus results in an increase in anterior and posterior curvatures and a reduction in corneal thickness. Anterior corneal ectasia is partially compensated by remodelling the corneal epithelium. Therefore, there is an alteration in the relationship between corneal surfaces and variation in corneal power. The variation in corneal power is one of the sources that induces errors in IOL power calculation.

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess a method for predicting total corneal power in keratoconus using several anterior surface parameters at 3 mm and 4 mm.

METHODS

    Tomographic data obtained using Pentacam (Oculus, Germany) were analysed from 280 eyes of 140 patients with keratoconus using anterior and posterior keratometry, anterior Q-value at 8 mm, central corneal thickness, Kmax location and value, and true net power at 4 mm (TNP). Calculated total corneal power (TCPc) at 3 mm was obtained using the Gauss formula. Predicted total corneal power at 3 mm (TCPp3) and 4 mm (TCPp4) was obtained from univariate (TCPp3u and TCPp4u) and multivariate linear regression formulae (TCPp3m and TCPp4m). SimK, anterior Q-value, vertical location, and Kmax value were used in the multivariate formulae. Mean absolute error (MAE) and median absolute error (MedAE) were also calculated. Absolute frequencies within dioptric ranges of all formulas divided for keratoconus grading were evaluated.

RESULTS

TCPc and TNP exhibited a good correlation (R2 = 0.58, p < 0.05) with a higher dispersion above 50 D of corneal power. Highly significant correlations were observed between TCPp3u and TCPc (R2 = 0.978, p < 0.05) and TCPp3m and TCPc (R2 = 0.989, p < 0.05). Lower but significant correlations were observed between TCPp4u and TNP (R2 = 0.692, p < 0.05) and between TCPp4m and TNP (R2 = 0.887, p < 0.05). The best results for TCP prediction at 3 and 4 mm were obtained with TCPp3m and TCPp4m as follows: MAE of TCPp3m was 0.24 ± 0.20 (SD) D with MedAE of 0.20 D, while MAE of TCPp4m was 0.96 ± 0.77 D with MedAE of 0.80 D. The 3 mm multivariate regression formula results in higher absolute frequencies of prediction errors in the total eyes within 0.5 D (93%) than the univariate formula (81%). At 4mm, the multivariate regression formula has a lower percentage within 0.5 D (32%) than the univariate formula (41%), but the percentage of the multivariate formula is higher within 1 D (63%) than the univariate formula (56%).

CONCLUSION

All formulas show a decrease in accuracy with increasing grades of keratoconus. Multivariate linear regression formulae using only anterior surface data can predict TCP with good approximation in eyes with keratoconus in cases where posterior surface parameters are unavailable. The vertical location of Kmax and the anterior asphericity could play a relevant role in the prediction of total corneal power in keratoconus.

Refractive surgical correction and treatment of keratoconus

Keratoconus is an ectatic corneal disorder that causes severe vision loss. Surgical options allow us to correct, partially or totally, the induced refractive error. Intracorneal ring segments (ICRS) implantation represents a minimally invasive surgical option that improves visual acuity, with a high success rate and a low overall complication rate. Corneal allogenic ICRS consists of ring segments derived from allogenic eye bank-processed donor corneas. Selective topography-guided transepithelial photorefractive or phototherapeutic keratectomy combined with CXL is another way in selected cases to improve spectacles corrected distance visual acuity. The microphotoablative remodeling of the central corneal profile is generally planned by optimizing the optical zones and minimizing tissue consumption. Phakic intraocular lens (PIOL) implant is considered in patients with stable disease and acceptable anatomical requirements. The two types of pIOLs, depending on their implantation inside the eye, are anterior chamber-pIOLs, which fixate to the anterior surface of the iris by using a polymethomethacrolate claw at the two haptics, and posterior chamber-pIOLs. In patients with both cataracts and keratoconus, the correct IOL power is difficult to obtain due to the irregular corneal shape and K values. Toric IOL is recommended, but carefully judging the topography and the possible need of subsequent keratoplasties.

Cataract surgery in Keratoconus revisited - An update on preoperative and intraoperative considerations and postoperative outcomes

PURPOSE

This review aims to evaluate and simplify the recent literature on preoperative surgical planning, intraoperative considerations, postoperative surprises, and their management in patients with keratoconus undergoing cataract surgery.

METHODS

A review of the literature was done to analyze all the pertinent articles on Keratoconus and cataract surgery.

RESULTS

The surgical planning of cataracts in eyes with keratoconus needs a multifaceted approach. Preoperatively, techniques such as cross-linking or the use of intra-corneal rings help stabilize the progression. Unreliable biometric measurements are a significant problem in keratoconus patients, especially in an advanced stage of the disease. It is better to consider actual K readings if the K value is less than 55D but for a K value, more than 55D using standard K values will prevent postoperative refractive surprises. For calculation of K values, an elevation-based device like pentacam gives better repeatability in mild to moderate cases whereas for advanced keratoconus none of the keratometers is reliable. Recently, the Kane keratoconus formula performed better in all stages of disease whereas previous studies showed good results with SRK/T formula is a mild and moderate disease. Monofocal intraocular lenses are a better choice in these patients. Toric lenses can be used in mild and stable keratoconus. Intraoperatively, the use of a customized RGP lens can overcome the challenge of image distortion and loss of visual perspective. Despite taking necessary measures, postoperative refractive surprise can occur and can be managed with IOL exchange or Secondary IOLs.

CONCLUSION

There is a spectrum of challenges in managing cataracts in keratoconus which makes thorough preoperative planning important for good surgical outcomes. Despite the measures, there might be post-operative surprises and the patients need to be informed regarding the same.

Refractive Outcomes of Non-Toric and Toric Intraocular Lenses in Mild, Moderate and Advanced Keratoconus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the refractive outcomes of non-toric and toric intraocular lenses (IOLs) in keratoconus (KC) using different IOL power calculation formulas. Methods: A systematic search was conducted to identify studies that report on refractive outcomes of different IOL power calculation formulas in KC patients undergoing cataract surgery. Inclusion criteria were primary posterior chamber non-toric and toric monofocal intraocular lens implantation, data on the degree of KC, explicit mention of the formula used for each stage of KC, and the number of eyes in each category. We calculated and compared the absolute and mean prediction errors, percentage of eyes within 0.5 D and 1 D from target, and the weighted absolute prediction errors of IOL formulas, all were given for KC degrees I–III. Results: The bibliographic search yielded 582 studies published between 1996 and 2020, 14 of which (in total 456 eyes) met the criteria: three studies on non-toric IOL (98 eyes), eight studies on toric IOLs (98 eyes) and three studies of unknown separation between non-toric and toric IOLs (260 eyes). The lowest absolute prediction error (APE) for mild, moderate, and advanced KC was seen with Kane’s IOL power formula with keratoconus adjustment. The APE for the top five IOL power formulas ranged 0.49–0.73 diopters (D) for mild (83–94%) of eyes within 1 D from the target), 1.08–1.21 D for moderate (51–57% within 1 D), and 1.44–2.86 D for advanced KC (12–48% within 1 D). Conclusions: Cataract surgery in eyes with mild-to-moderate KC generally achieves satisfactory postoperative refractive results. In patients with advanced KC, a minority of the eyes achieved spherical equivalent refraction within 1 D from the target. The Kane’s formula with keratoconus adjustment showed the best results in all KC stages.

Comparison of Four Intraocular Power Calculation Formulas in Keratoconus Eyes

Introduction:

This study aimed to evaluate the differences in Intraocular Lens (IOL) power in keratoconus (KC) eyes between calculations obtained clinically with the most commonly used formulas in healthy eyes (SRK T, Holladay 1, Hoffer Q and Haigis) as well as to define predictive factors for such differences.

Methods:

This retrospective study comprised 43 keratoconus eyes of 22 patients with no previous ocular surgery. IOL powers were calculated with SRK T, Holladay 1, Hoffer Q, and Haigis formulas, considering the Effective Lens Position (ELP) of each formula and the desired refraction of 0 D (Rdes=0 D).

Results:

All differences between formulas were statistically significant and clinically relevant. Haigis formula always provided higher values compared to the rest of the formulas, with the highest differences observed when comparing Haigis with Hoffer (0.84 D) and Hoffer Q (1.17 D) formulas. The lowest difference was obtained for the comparison between SRK-T and Holladay 1 formulas (0.22 D). Differences of the Haigis formula compared to the rest were higher as the magnitude of the IOL power calculated decreased, becoming the patient more myopic. Increased differences between Haigis and Hoffer formulas were observed in eyes with deep anterior chambers, steeper anterior and posterior corneal surfaces, and high axial lengths.

Conclusion:

The most comparable results in IOL power in keratoconus are provided by the Holladay 1 and SRK T formulas, whereas the Haigis formula provides the most discrepant outcome. The consideration of the curvature of the second corneal surface in IOL power calculations in keratoconus may decrease the variability between calculation methods. However, other factors as anterior chamber depth or axial length are also relevant.

[Intracorneal ring segments in keratoconus management]

Intracorneal ring segments (ICRS), used in the management of keratoconus since the 2000s, have enjoyed significant technological development. Various types of ICRS exist, whose arc length, thickness, and diameter can be chosen according to the desired effect on the spherical equivalent, keratometry and asphericity. Individualized implantation strategies, based on each patient's topographic and tomographic pattern, are constantly evolving. The surgical procedure is standardized, and complications remain very rare. Combined procedures (corneal collagen cross-linking and refractive photokeratectomy±topo-guided, phakic and pseudophakic intraocular lenses) are increasingly used and require a good knowledge of the effect of ICRS alone on the keratoconic cornea. The objective of this review is to summarize clinical practices used in the visual rehabilitation of keratoconic patients using the ICRS+- combined procedures.

Analysis of total corneal astigmatism with a rotating Scheimpflug camera in keratoconus

Background

To analyze mean corneal powers and astigmatisms on anterior, posterior, and total cornea in patients with keratoconus as calculated according to various keratometric measurements using a Scheimpflug camera.

Methods

We examined the left eyes of 64 patients (41 males and 23 females; mean age 29.94 ± 6.63 years) with keratoconus. We measured simulated K (Sim-K), posterior K, true net power (TNP) and four types of total corneal refractive powers (TCRP). We then used the obtained values to analyze mean K, and corneal astigmatism. TCRP were measured at 2.0 ~ 5.0 mm.

Results

Mean corneal powers from Sim K, posterior K, and TNP were 49.12 ± 3.99, − 7.39 ± 0.79, and 47.78 ± 4.09 diopters, respectively. For TCRP centered on the pupil, mean K tended to decrease with measurement area (all p < 0.01). While, both mean K and astigmatism measured using TCRP centered on the apex decreased with measurement area (all p < 0.001). TCRP centered on the apex were greater than those centered on the pupil for mean K values calculated using TCRP (all p < 0.001). The proportion of WTR was greatest on the anterior and total cornea. As the measurement area moved to the periphery, the proportion of WTR increased.

Conclusions

Mean corneal powers and astigmatisms on total cornea with keratoconus change depending on calculation methods and measurement areas.

An innovative approach for determining the customized refractive index of ectatic corneas in cataractous patients

The aim of this study is to determine the customized refractive index of ectatic corneas and also propose a method for determining the corneal and IOL power in these eyes. Seven eyes with moderate and severe corneal ectatic disorders, which had been under cataract surgery, were included. At least three months after cataract surgery, axial length, cornea, IOL thickness and the distance between IOL from cornea, and aberrometry were measured. All the measured points of the posterior and anterior parts of the cornea converted to points cloud and surface by using the MATLAB and Solidworks software. The implanted IOLs were designed by Zemax software. The ray tracing analysis was performed on the customized eye models, and the corneal refractive index was determined by minimizing the difference between the measured aberrations from the device and resulted aberrations from the simulation. Then, by the use of preoperative corneal images, corneal power was calculated by considering the anterior and posterior parts of the cornea and refractive index of 1.376 and the customized corneal refractive index in different regions and finally it was entered into the IOL power calculation formulas. The corneal power in the 4 mm region and the Barrett formula resulted the prediction error of six eyes within ± 1 diopter. It seems that using the total corneal power along with the Barrett formula can prevent postoperative hyperopic shift, especially in eyes with advanced ectatic disorders.

Intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with keratoconus

The purpose was to review and document the methods used to calculate the power of the intraocular lens (IOL) to be implanted in cataract surgery in the specific scenario of eyes with keratoconus. This review included all scientific articles published in English that focused on the parameters and formulas used to calculate the power of the IOL to be implanted in eyes with keratoconus undergoing cataract surgery. There are few publications that show in detail how IOL power is calculated in these particular cases. If the keratometric value used was based on the standard refractive index (1.3375), it resulted in a postoperative refractive error with a tendency to hyperopia. The SRK/T formula yielded the best outcomes. The greater the severity of keratoconus the greater was the deviation of the postoperative refractive status from the target outcome.

Comparison of Simulated Keratometry and Total Refractive Power for Keratoconus According to the Stage of Amsler-Krumeich Classification

This study was aimed to assess the simulated keratometry (Sim K) and the total corneal refractive power (TCRP) in eyes with keratoconus with respect to the Amsler-Krumeich classification. We enrolled 100 eyes of 100 keratoconic patients and 25 age-matched normal eyes. The Sim K and TCRP were measured with a rotating Scheimpflug system (Pentacam HR, Oculus). The differences between Sim K and TCRP in the keratoconus group were significantly larger than those in the control group (p < 0.001). The differences between Sim K and TCRP became larger in the progressive stages of the disease (p = 0.191 for stage 1, p = 0.008 for stage 2, p < 0.001 for stage 3, p < 0.001 for stage 4). We found a significant correlation of Sim K with the differences between Sim K and TCRP in keratoconic patients (r = 0.497, p < 0.001). The differences between Sim K and TCRP for keratoconus were significantly larger than those for normal eyes, and the differences between Sim K and TCRP tended to become larger in the progressive stages of the disease. It is suggested that the Sim K readings overestimate the TCRP, especially in advanced keratoconus, and that this discrepancy is a possible source of a hyperopic refractive error after cataract surgery.

A New Approach for the Calculation of Total Corneal Astigmatism Considering the Magnitude and Orientation of Posterior Corneal Astigmatism and Thickness

PURPOSE

To evaluate a new method of calculation of total corneal astigmatism based on Gaussian optics and the power design of a spherocylindrical lens (C) in the healthy eye and to compare it with keratometric (K) and power vector (PV) methods.

METHODS

A total of 92 healthy eyes of 92 patients (age, 17-65 years) were enrolled. Corneal astigmatism was calculated in all cases using K, PV, and our new approach C that considers the contribution of corneal thickness. An evaluation of the interchangeability of our new approach with the other 2 methods was performed using Bland-Altman analysis.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences between methods were found in the magnitude of astigmatism (P < 0.001), with the highest values provided by K. These differences in the magnitude of astigmatism were clinically relevant when K and C were compared [limits of agreement (LoA), -0.40 to 0.62 D), but not for the comparison between PV and C (LoA, -0.03 to 0.01 D). Differences in the axis of astigmatism between methods did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.408). However, they were clinically relevant when comparing K and C (LoA, -5.48 to 15.68 degrees) but not for the comparison between PV and C (LoA, -1.68 to 1.42 degrees).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of our new approach for the calculation of total corneal astigmatism provides astigmatic results comparable to the PV method, which suggests that the effect of pachymetry on total corneal astigmatism is minimal in healthy eyes.

Comparison of Anterior, Posterior, and Total Corneal Astigmatism Measured Using a Single Scheimpflug Camera in Healthy and Keratoconus Eyes

Purpose

To compare the effect of posterior corneal astigmatism on the estimation of total corneal astigmatism using anterior corneal measurements (simulated keratometry [K]) between eyes with keratoconus and healthy eyes.

Methods

Thirty-three eyes of 33 patients with keratoconus of grade I or II and 33 eyes of 33 age- and sex-matched healthy control subjects were enrolled. Anterior, posterior, and total corneal cylinder powers and flat meridians measured by a single Scheimpflug camera were analyzed. The difference in corneal astigmatism between the simulated K and total cornea was evaluated.

Results

The mean anterior, posterior, and total corneal cylinder powers of the keratoconus group (4.37 ± 1.73, 0.95 ± 0.39, and 4.36 ± 1.74 cylinder diopters [CD], respectively) were significantly greater than those of the control group (1.10 ± 0.68, 0.39 ± 0.18, and 0.97 ± 0.63 CD, respectively). The cylinder power difference between the simulated K and total cornea was positively correlated with the posterior corneal cylinder power and negatively correlated with the absolute flat meridian difference between the simulated K and total cornea in both groups. The mean magnitude of the vector difference between the astigmatism of the simulated K and total cornea of the keratoconus group (0.67 ± 0.67 CD) was significantly larger than that of the control group (0.28 ± 0.12 CD).

Conclusions

Eyes with keratoconus had greater estimation errors of total corneal astigmatism based on anterior corneal measurement than did healthy eyes. Posterior corneal surface measurement should be more emphasized to determine the total corneal astigmatism in eyes with keratoconus.

Algorithm for Correcting the Keratometric Error in the Estimation of the Corneal Power in Keratoconus Eyes after Accelerated Corneal Collagen Crosslinking

Purpose

To analyze the errors associated to corneal power calculation using the keratometric approach in keratoconus eyes after accelerated corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) surgery and to obtain a model for the estimation of an adjusted corneal refractive index (n_kadj) minimizing such errors.

Methods

Potential differences (ΔP_c) among keratometric (P_k) and Gaussian corneal power (P_c^Gauss) were simulated. Three algorithms based on the use of n_kadj for the estimation of an adjusted keratometric corneal power (P_kadj) were developed. The agreement between P_k(1.3375) (keratometric power using the keratometric index of 1.3375), P_c^Gauss, and P_kadj was evaluated. The validity of the algorithm developed was investigated in 21 keratoconus eyes undergoing accelerated CXL.

Results

P_k(1.3375) overestimated corneal power between 0.3 and 3.2 D in theoretical simulations and between 0.8 and 2.9 D in the clinical study (ΔP_c). Three linear equations were defined for n_kadj to be used for different ranges of r_1c. In the clinical study, differences between P_kadj and P_c^Gauss did not exceed ±0.8 D n_k = 1.3375. No statistically significant differences were found between P_kadj and P_c^Gauss (p > 0.05) and P_k(1.3375) and P_kadj (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The use of the keratometric approach in keratoconus eyes after accelerated CXL can lead to significant clinical errors. These errors can be minimized with an adjusted keratometric approach.

Preliminary validation of an optimized algorithm for intraocular lens power calculation in keratoconus

Purpose:

This study aimed to evaluate the theoretical influence on intraocular lens power (P_IOL) calculation of the use of keratometric approach for corneal power (P_c) calculation in keratoconus and to develop and validate an algorithm preliminarily to minimize this influence.

Methods:

P_c was calculated theoretically with the classical keratometric approach, the Gaussian equation, and the keratometric approach using a variable keratometric index (n_kadj) dependent on r_1c(P_kadj). Differences in P_IOL calculations (ΔP_IOL) using keratometric and Gaussian P_c values were evaluated. Preliminary clinical validation of a P_IOL algorithm using P_kadj was performed in 13 keratoconus eyes.

Results:

P_IOL underestimation was present if P_c was overestimated, and vice versa. Theoretical P_IOL overestimation up to −5.6 D and −6.2 D using Le Grand and Gullstrand eye models was found for a keratometric index of 1.3375. If n_kadj was used, maximal Δ P_IOL was ±1.1 D, with most of the values ≤±0.6 D. Clinically, P_IOL under- and over-estimations ranged from −1.1 to − 0.4 D. No statistically significant differences were found between P_IOL obtained with P_kadj and Gaussian equation (P > 0.05).

Conclusion:

The use of the keratometric P_c for P_IOL calculations in keratoconus can lead to significant errors that may be minimized using a P_kadj approach.

Impact of corneal cross-linking combined with photorefractive keratectomy on blurring strength

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of corneal cross-linking combined with photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) on blurring strength.

Methods

A total of 63 patients with keratoconus were recruited for this study, and two study groups were formed according to the therapeutic intervention: corneal collagen cross-linking (CxL) group (33 patients) received corneal cross-linking according to the Dresden protocol, while the rest additionally received topography-guided photorefractive keratectomy (tCxL). The impact of surgical procedure on blurring strength was assessed by power vector analysis. Potential association between blurring strength and vision-specific quality of life was assessed using the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ) 25 instrument.

Results

Blurring strength presented excellent correlation with NEI-VFQ scores both preoperatively and postoperatively (all P<0.01). Both groups demonstrated nonsignificant changes in best-corrected visual acuity; however, only the tCxL group had significant reduction in blurring strength (13.48+10.86 [preoperative], 4.26+7.99 [postoperative], P=0.042).

Conclusion

Only the combined treatment (tCxL) resulted in significant reduction in blurring strength. Moreover, the excellent correlation of blurring strength with NEI-VFQ scores indicates its reliability as an index of self-reported quality of life in keratoconus, since it seems to address the nonsignificant changes in best-corrected visual acuity following CxL treatments that are conceived as subjective improvement by the patient.

New approach for correction of error associated with keratometric estimation of corneal power in keratoconus

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to obtain the exact value of the keratometric index (nkexact) and to clinically validate a variable keratometric index (nkadj) that minimizes this error.

METHODS

The nkexact value was determined by obtaining differences (ΔPc) between keratometric corneal power (Pk) and Gaussian corneal power ((Equation is included in full-text article.)) equal to 0. The nkexact was defined as the value associated with an equivalent difference in the magnitude of ΔPc for extreme values of posterior corneal radius (r2c) for each anterior corneal radius value (r1c). This nkadj was considered for the calculation of the adjusted corneal power (Pkadj). Values of r1c ∈ (4.2, 8.5) mm and r2c ∈ (3.1, 8.2) mm were considered. Differences of True Net Power with (Equation is included in full-text article.), Pkadj, and Pk(1.3375) were calculated in a clinical sample of 44 eyes with keratoconus.

RESULTS

nkexact ranged from 1.3153 to 1.3396 and nkadj from 1.3190 to 1.3339 depending on the eye model analyzed. All the nkadj values adjusted perfectly to 8 linear algorithms. Differences between Pkadj and (Equation is included in full-text article.)did not exceed ±0.7 D (Diopter). Clinically, nk = 1.3375 was not valid in any case. Pkadj and True Net Power and Pk(1.3375) and Pkadj were statistically different (P < 0.01), whereas no differences were found between (Equation is included in full-text article.)and Pkadj (P > 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a single value of nk for the calculation of the total corneal power in keratoconus has been shown to be imprecise, leading to inaccuracies in the detection and classification of this corneal condition. Furthermore, our study shows the relevance of corneal thickness in corneal power calculations in keratoconus.

The effect of posterior corneal flat meridian and astigmatism amount on the total corneal astigmatism estimated from anterior corneal measurements

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effects of posterior corneal astigmatism and the absolute flat meridian difference between anterior and posterior corneal surfaces (AMDAnt-Post) on the estimation of total corneal astigmatism using anterior corneal measurements (simulated keratometry [K]).

METHODS

Ninety-nine eyes of 99 healthy participants were enrolled. Anterior, posterior, and total mean corneal power, cylinder power, flat meridian, and vector components J0, and J45 measured by a dual Scheimpflug camera were analyzed. The correlation between the posterior corneal cylinder power, AMDAnt-Post, and the difference in the cylinder power between simulated K and total cornea (cylinder power differenceSimK-Tot) were evaluated.

RESULTS

The cylinder power differenceSimK-Tot was positively correlated with the posterior corneal cylinder power (rho = 0.704 and P < 0.001) and negatively correlated with AMDAnt-Post (rho = -0.717 and P < 0.001). In the multivariate linear regression analysis, anterior corneal J0 was strongly associated with the posterior corneal cylinder power and the AMDAnt-Post. When corneal J0 had a positive value, the cylinder power of simulated K tended to be larger than the total corneal cylinder power. In comparison, the opposite trend was presented in eyes with negative anterior corneal J0. When anterior corneal J0 was larger than 1.0 or smaller than -0.9, the errors from estimating the total corneal cylinder power using anterior corneal measurements tended to be larger than 0.25 D.

CONCLUSION

Posterior corneal astigmatism should be considered for more accurate corneal astigmatism predictions, especially in eyes with anterior corneal astigmatism greater than 2.0 D of with-the-rule astigmatism or greater than 1.8 D of against-the-rule astigmatism.