scholarly journals Effect of Implantable Collamer Lens on Anterior Segment Measurement and Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Based on IOLMaster 700 and Sirius

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Xiaoyong Chen ◽  
Di Zhang ◽  
Ziyuan Liu ◽  
Yinan Liu ◽  
Hongyuan Cai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ray Tracing ◽  
Intraocular Lens ◽  
Measurement Errors ◽  
Corneal Thickness ◽  
Power Calculation ◽  
Anterior Surface ◽  
Implantable Collamer Lens ◽  
Iol Power ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Iolmaster 700

Purpose. To investigate the possible effect of an implantable collamer lens (ICL) on ocular biometrics and intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation. Methods. Ocular measurements were taken preoperatively and at the two-month follow-up using IOLMaster 700 and Sirius in 85 eyes (43 patients) who had previously undergone ICL surgery. IOL power was calculated using either IOLMaster 700 (Barrett Universal II formula) or Sirius (ray-tracing). All data were compared using the paired t-test. Results. The difference between preoperative and postoperative anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), and keratometry on the steep axis (K2) measured by IOLMaster 700 was statistically significant (p < 0.001). In 11 of 85 eyes, IOLMaster misjudged the anterior surface of the ICL as that of the lens, leading to an error in ACD and LT. There were no significant differences between preoperative and postoperative axial length (AL) (p = 0.223), white to white (WTW) (p = 0.100), keratometry on flat axis (K1) (p = 0.117), or central corneal thickness (CCT) (p = 0.648), measured using IOLMaster. The difference in IOL power calculated using the Barrett II formula was significant (p = 0.013). Regression analysis showed that AL and K had the greatest influence on IOL calculation (p < 0.001), and ACD and LT had less influence (p = 0.002, p = 0.218, respectively). K1 and K2 were modified to exclude the influence of K2, and modified IOLs showed no difference between pre and postoperation (p = 0.372). Preoperative and postoperative ACD measured using Sirius were significantly different (p < 0.001); however, the IOL power calculated using ray-tracing technology showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). Conclusions. The ocular biometric apparatus may misjudge the anterior surface of the lens, resulting in measurement errors of ACD and LT, which has little effect on the calculation of IOL power when using IOLMaster 700 (Barrett Universal II formula) and Sirius (ray-tracing).

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

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shiva Pirhadi ◽  
Keivan Maghooli ◽  
Khosrow Jadidi
Keyword(s):  
Refractive Index ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Ray Tracing ◽  
Prediction Error ◽  
Power Calculation ◽  
Corneal Power ◽  
Iol Power Calculation ◽  
Iol Power ◽  
Hyperopic Shift ◽  
The Difference

Abstract 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.

scholarly journals Accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation using Scheimpflug tomography and OKULIX ray tracing software in corneal scarring

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karim Mahmoud Nabil
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Ray Tracing ◽  
Intraocular Lens ◽  
Absolute Error ◽  
Power Calculation ◽  
Corneal Scarring ◽  
Iol Power Calculation ◽  
Intraocular Lens Power ◽  
Iol Power ◽  
Lens Power

Abstract Background: To evaluate the accuracy of intraocular lens power (IOL) calculation using Scheimpflug tomography and OKULIX ray tracing software in corneal scarring. Methods: This study was conducted on 40 consecutive eyes, 20 cases with corneal scarring and coexisting cataract, and 20 controls with clear cornea, which underwent uneventful phacoemulsification and IOL implantation following Scheimpflug tomography and OKULIX ray tracing software and third generation IOL power calculation formulas for IOL power calculation. Accuracy of IOL power calculation was evaluated by subtracting expected and achieved spherical refraction 3 months postoperatively and was recorded as mean absolute error (MAE). Distance uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) for each eye was measured using Snellen chart preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively; visual acuity was scored and converted to the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (LogMar). Results: In cases of corneal scarring, 20 eyes (100 %) yielded a postoperative spherical refraction which differed less than 1 diopter (D) from predicted, in 16 eyes (80 %) the postoperative spherical refraction was within 0.50 D from expected. The MAE was 0.2 D in cases, which did not differ significantly compared to controls (MAE 0.1 D). In corneal scarring cases, distance UCVA showed significant improvement from 1.3 Log Mar (Snellen equivalent 20/400) preoperatively to 0.5 Log Mar (Snellen equivalent 20/60) 3 months postoperatively. Conclusion: Scheimpflug tomography combined with OKULIX ray tracing software for calculation of IOL power provides accurate results in cases of corneal scarring.

scholarly journals Accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation using Scheimpflug tomography and OKULIX ray tracing software in corneal scarring

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
karim Mahmoud nabil
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Ray Tracing ◽  
Intraocular Lens ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Power Calculation ◽  
Corneal Scarring ◽  
Iol Power Calculation ◽  
Intraocular Lens Power ◽  
Iol Power ◽  
Lens Power

Abstract Background: To evaluate the accuracy of intraocular lens power (IOL) calculation using Scheimpflug tomography and OKULIX ray tracing software in corneal scarring. Methods: This study was conducted on 40 consecutive eyes, 20 cases with corneal scarring and coexisting cataract, and 20 controls with clear cornea, which underwent uneventful phacoemulsification and IOL implantation following Scheimpflug tomography and OKULIX ray tracing software and third generation IOL power calculation formulas for IOL power calculation. Accuracy of IOL power calculation was evaluated by subtracting expected and achieved spherical refraction 3 months postoperatively and was recorded as mean absolute error (MAE). Distance uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) for each eye was measured using Snellen chart preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively; visual acuity was scored and converted to the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (LogMar).Values were recorded as mean ±SD (standard deviation). Student t-test (t) and Mann Whitney test (U) were used for parametric comparison of the means. Intra class Correlation (ICC) coefficient and Pearson correlation Coefficient (r) were used to assess agreement. A P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: In cases of corneal scarring, 20 eyes (100 %) yielded a postoperative spherical refraction which differed less than 1 diopter (D) from predicted, in 16 eyes (80 %) the postoperative spherical refraction was within 0.50 D from expected. The MAE was 0.2 D in cases, which did not differ significantly compared to controls (MAE 0.1 D). In corneal scarring cases, distance UCVA showed significant improvement from 1.3 Log Mar (Snellen equivalent 20/400) preoperatively to 0.5 Log Mar (Snellen equivalent 20/60) 3 months postoperatively. Conclusion: Scheimpflug tomography combined with OKULIX ray tracing software for calculation of IOL power provides accurate results in cases of corneal scarring.

scholarly journals Post Cataract Surgery Refractive Error in Myopic Patients Using SRK/T Versus Holladay 1 Formula for IOL Power Calculation

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sidra Anwar, Atif Mansoor Ahmad, Irum Abbas, Zyeima Arif
Keyword(s):  
Intraocular Lens ◽  
Refractive Error ◽  
Axial Length ◽  
Power Calculation ◽  
Mean Error ◽  
Iol Power Calculation ◽  
Group A ◽  
Iol Power ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Group B

Purpose: To compare post-operative mean refractive error with SandersRetzlaff-Kraff/theoretical (SRK-T) and Holladay 1 formulae for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in cataract patients with longer axial lengths. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Ophthalmology, Shaikh Zayed Hospital Lahore from 01 January 2017 01 January, 2018. Material and Methods: A total of 80 patients were selected from Ophthalmology Outdoor of Shaikh Zayed Hospital Lahore. The patients were randomly divided into two groups of 40 each by lottery method. IOL power calculation was done in group A using SRK-T formula and in group B using Holladay1 formula after keratomery and A-scan. All patients underwent phacoemulsification with foldable lens implantation. Post-operative refractive error was measured after one month and mean error was calculated and compared between the two groups. Results: Eighty cases were included in the study with a mean age of 55.8 ± 6.2 years. The mean axial length was 25.63 ± 0.78mm, and the mean keratometric power was 43.68 ± 1.1 D. The mean post-operative refractive error in group A (SRK/T) was +0.36D ± 0.33D and in group B (Holladay 1) it was +0.68 ± 0.43. The Mean Error in group A was +0.37D ± 0.31D as compared to +0.69D ± 0.44D in group B. Conclusion: SRK/T formula is superior to Holladay 1 formula for cases having longer axial lengths. Key words: Phacoemulsification, intraocular lens power, longer axial length, biometry.

Comparison of the accuracy of 11 intraocular lens power calculation formulas

2020 ◽  
pp. 112067212096203
Author(s):  
David Carmona-González ◽  
Alfredo Castillo-Gómez ◽  
Carlos Palomino-Bautista ◽  
Marta Romero-Domínguez ◽  
María Ángeles Gutiérrez-Moreno
Keyword(s):  
Intraocular Lens ◽  
Case Series ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Power Calculation ◽  
Refractive Outcome ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
Intraocular Lens Power Calculation ◽  
Iol Power Calculation ◽  
Refractive Outcomes ◽  
Iol Power

Purpose To compare the accuracy of 11 intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas (SRK-T, Hoffer Q, Holladay I, Haigis, Holladay II, Olsen, Barrett Universal II, Hill-RBF, Ladas Super formula, EVO and Kane). Setting Private university hospital (QuironSalud, Madrid, Spain). Design Retrospective case series Methods Data were compiled from 481 eyes of 481 patients who had undergone uneventful cataract surgery with IOL insertion. Preoperative biometric measurements were made using an IOL Master® 700. Respective ULIB IOL constants ( http://ocusoft.de/ulib/c1.htm ) for each of 4 IOL models implanted were used to calculate the predictive refractive outcome for each formula. This was compared with the actual refractive outcome determined 3 months postoperatively. The primary outcome was mean absolute prediction error (MAE). The study sample was divided according to axial length (AL) into three groups of eyes: short (⩽22.00 mm), normal (22.00–25.00 mm) and long (⩾25.00 mm). Results The Barrett Universal II and Haigis formulas yielded the lowest MAEs over the entire AL range ( p < .01, except EVO) as well as in the long ( p < .01, all formulas) and normal ( p < .01, except Haigis, Holladay II, Olsen and LSF) eyes. In the short eyes, the lower MAEs were provided by Haigis and EVO ( p < .01 except Hoffer Q, SRK/T and Holladay I). Conclusions Barrett Universal II was the most accurate for IOL power calculation in the normal and long eyes. For short eyes, the formulas Haigis and EVO seem best at predicting refractive outcomes.

Ray tracing software for intraocular lens power calculation after corneal excimer laser surgery

2014 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 276-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megumi Saiki ◽  
Kazuno Negishi ◽  
Naoko Kato ◽  
Hidemasa Torii ◽  
Murat Dogru ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ray Tracing ◽  
Excimer Laser ◽  
Intraocular Lens ◽  
Laser Surgery ◽  
Power Calculation ◽  
Intraocular Lens Power Calculation ◽  
Intraocular Lens Power ◽  
Lens Power ◽  
Lens Power Calculation

scholarly journals Cataract Surgery following Sequential Myopic and Hyperopic LASIK

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 264-268
Author(s):  
Tao Ming Thomas Chia ◽  
Hoon C. Jung
Keyword(s):  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Intraocular Lens ◽  
Calculation Method ◽  
Cataract Extraction ◽  
Power Calculation ◽  
Iol Implantation ◽  
Patient Dissatisfaction ◽  
Iol Power Calculation ◽  
Iol Power

We report a case of patient dissatisfaction after sequential myopic and hyperopic LASIK in the same eye. We discuss the course of management for this patient involving eventual cataract extraction and intraocular lens (IOL) implantation with attention to the IOL power calculation method used.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document