Comparison of three newer generation freely available intraocular lens power calculation formulae across all axial lengths

• Published in: Indian journal of ophthalmology 2021-03, Vol.69 (3), p.580-584
• Main Authors: Khatib, Zain, Haldipurkar, Suhas, Shetty, Vijay, Dahake, Harsha, Nagvekar, Pranoti, Kashelkar, Priyanka
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: barrett; Cataracts; Comparative analysis; evo; Formulae; hill-rbf; Intraocular lenses; Mathematics; Mechanical properties; Original; Surgery
• ISSN: 0301-4738; 1998-3689
• DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_943_20

Purpose: The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of three newer generation formulae (Barrett Universal II, EVO, Hill-RBF 2.0) for calculation of power of two standard IOLs-the Acrysof IQ and Tecnis ZCB00 across all axial lengths. Methods: In this retrospective series, 206 eyes of 206 patients, operated for cataract surgery with above two IOLs over the last 6 months, were included in the study. Preoperative biometry measurements were obtained from LenstarLS900. By using recommended lens constants, the mean error for each formula was calculated and compared. Then, the optimized IOL constants were calculated to reduce the mean error to zero. Mean and median absolute errors were calculated for all eyes and separately for short (AL24.5 mm). Absolute errors and percentages of eyes within prediction errors of ±0.25 D, ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D were compared. Results: Prediction error with using recommended lens constants was significantly lower in the Barrett Universal II formula as compared to the other two formulae. However, after optimizing lens constants, there were no significant differences in the absolute errors between the three formulae. The formulae ranked by mean absolute error were as follows: Barrett Universal II (0.304 D), EVO (0.317 D), and Hill-RBF (0.322) D. There were no significant differences between absolute errors in the three formulae in each of the short-, medium-, and long-eye subgroups. Conclusion: With proper lens constant optimization, the Barrett Universal II, EVO, and Hill-RBF 2.0 formulae were equally accurate in predicting IOL power across the entire range of axial lengths.