Abstract
Purpose To compare the accuracy of 9 intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas (SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Haigis, Barrett Universal II, Kane, EVO 2.0, Ladas Super formula and Hill-RBF 3.0) using partial coherence interferometry (PCI).
Methods Data from patients having uncomplicated cataract surgery with the insertion of 1 of 3 IOL types were included. All preoperative biometric measurements were performed using PCI. Prediction errors (PE) were deduced from refractive outcomes evaluated 3 months after surgery. The mean prediction error (ME), mean absolute prediction error (MAE), median absolute prediction error (MedAE), and standard deviation of prediction error (SD) were calculated, as well as the percentage of eyes with a PE within ±0.25, ±0.50, ±0.75 and ±1.00D for each formula.
Results Included in the study were 126 eyes of 126 patients. Kane achieved the lowest MAE and SD across the entire sample as well as the highest percentage of PE within ±0.50D, and was proven to be more accurate than Haigis and Hoffer Q (P <.001). For an axial length of more than 26.0 mm, EVO 2.0 and Barrett obtained the lowest MAEs, with EVO 2.0 and Kane showing a higher percentage of prediction at ±0.50D compared to old generation formulas except for SRK/T (P =.04).
Conclusion All investigated formulas achieved good results; there was a tendency towards better outcomes with new generation formulas, especially in atypical eyes.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The current study was conducted with the approval of the Ethics Board at the Saint-Joseph University (USJ), Beirut, Lebanon, and adhered to the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
