IOL Power Calculation in Eyes Undergoing Combined Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty and Cataract Surgery

Comparison of Pre- and Post-DMEK Keratometry and Total Keratometry Values for IOL Power Calculations in Eyes Undergoing Triple DMEK

PURPOSE

To evaluate prediction accuracy of pre- and post-DMEK keratometry (K) and total keratometry (TK) values for IOL power calculations in Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) eyes undergoing DMEK with cataract surgery (triple DMEK).

METHODS

Retrospective cross-sectional multicenter study of 55 FECD eyes (44 patients) that underwent triple DMEK between 2019 and 2022 between two centers in USA and Europe. Swept-source optical coherence tomography biometry (IOLMaster 700) was used for pre- and post-DMEK measurements. K and TK values were used for power calculations with ten formulae (Barrett Universal II (BUII), Castrop, Cooke K6, EVO 2.0, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Hoffer QST, Holladay I, Kane, and SRK/T). Mean error, mean absolute error (MAE), standard deviation, and percentage of eyes within ±0.50/±1.00 diopters (D) were calculated. Studied formulae were additionally adjusted using a method published previously (IOLup1D Method), which increases the IOL power by 1D. While both eyes from the same patient were considered for descriptive statistics, we restricted to one eye per individual (44 eyes for statistical comparisons.

RESULTS

MAEs for all formulae were lower for post-DMEK K and TK than pre-DMEK K and TK by an average of 0.24 and 0.47 D, respectively. The lowest MAE was 0.49 D for Kane using post-DMEK TK, and the highest MAE was 1.05 D for BUII using pre-DMEK TK. Most IOLup1D formulae had lower MAEs than pre-DMEK K and TK formulae.

CONCLUSIONS

The IOLup1D Method should be used instead of pre-DMEK K and TK values for triple DMEK in FECD eyes. Using post-DMEK TK values for cataract surgery after DMEK provides better refractive accuracy than any of the three studied methods used for triple DMEK procedures.

Hitting the refractive target in corneal endothelial transplantation triple procedures: A systematic review

In phakic patients Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) or Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) are frequently combined with phacoemulsification and intraocular lens (IOL) implantation (triple procedure). This surgery might cause a refractive shift difficult to predict. Early DMEK and DSAEK results have shown a tendency toward a hyperopic shift. Myopic postoperative refraction is typically intended to correct this postoperative refractive defect and to bring all eyes as close to emmetropia as possible. We sought to understand the mechanism underlying the hyperopization and to identify predictive factors for poorer refractive outcomes, the most suitable target refraction and IOL calculation methods in patients undergoing combined cataract extraction and lamellar endothelial corneal transplantation (DSAEK or DMEK) for endothelial dysfunctions. Of the 407 articles analyzed, only 18 were included in the analysis. A myopic target between -0.50 D and -0.75 was the most common (up to -1.50 for DSAEK triple procedures), even though no optimum target was found. Hyperopic surprises appeared more frequently in corneas that were flatter in the center than in the periphery (oblate posterior profile). Among the numerous IOL calculation formulas, there was no apparent preference.

Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty combined with presbyopia-correcting and toric intraocular lenses - a narrative review

Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) is the leading indication for EK and may coexist with cataract and presbyopia. Notably, the outcomes of phacoemulsification in FECD patients are not as favorable as those in eyes without this condition. Historically, only monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) were recommended for these patients. However, recent reports have described the implantation of Premium-IOLs (such as Multifocal IOLs, Enhanced Depth of Focus IOLs, and Toric IOLs) in FECD eyes undergoing cataract surgery and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK). While the results are encouraging, they are not as optimal as those from unoperated eyes, especially when comparing simultaneous procedures to sequential ones. It's advised to perform the DMEK first to improve the accuracy of IOL calculations. Still, even successfully operated eyes may experience secondary graft failure or graft rejection after DMEK. The success rate of a secondary DMEK is typically lower than that of the initial procedure. Furthermore, if the postoperative thickness after DMEK is less than anticipated, laser enhancements might not be an option. There's a pressing need for more controlled and randomized clinical trials to ascertain the safety and effectiveness of Premium-IOLs for FECD eyes. This narrative review aims to collate evidence on the use of Premium IOL technologies in eyes receiving EK and to underscore key points for surgeons performing EK combined with cataract surgery.

Standard vs total keratometry for intraocular lens power calculation in cataract surgery combined with DMEK

PURPOSE

To compare the prediction accuracy of standard keratometry (K) and total keratometry (TK) for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in eyes undergoing combined cataract surgery and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (triple DMEK).

SETTING

Tertiary care academic referral center.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

Review of 83 eyes (63 patients) that underwent triple DMEK between 2019 and 2021. Biometry measurements were obtained using a swept-source optical biometer (IOLMaster 700). 63 eyes were used for statistical analysis. Mean error, mean absolute error (MAE), SD, median absolute error, maximum absolute error, root mean squared prediction error, and the percentage of eyes within prediction errors of ±0.50 diopters (D) and ±1.00 D were calculated for 9 multivariate and third-generation formulas using K and TK values (Barrett Universal II, Yeo EVO 2.0, Cooke K6, Kane, Pearl-DGS, Haigis, Holladay 1, Hoffer Q, and SRK/T). Formulas were additionally tested by using the prediction for an IOL power 1 D below the IOL used (IOLup1D).

RESULTS

For all formulas, MAE was lower for K than for TK by an average of 0.21 D. The lowest MAE value observed was 0.67 D for "adjusted" SRK/T using K, and the highest MAE values observed were 1.24 D and 1.24 D for nonadjusted Hoffer Q and Haigis using TK, respectively. Overall, lower MAE values were observed for multivariate formulas and SRK/T.

CONCLUSIONS

In triple DMEK eyes, the prediction accuracy of K was higher than that of TK. The most accurate formulas were SRK/T and multivariate formulas using K with the IOLup1D adjustment.