Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: To assess the accuracy of Haigis, Holladay 1, Hoffer Q and SRK/T formulae in eyes with axial length of <22.00 mm. DESIGN: Retrospective comparative analysis. PARTICIPANTS: 163 eyes of 97 patients undergoing phacoemulsification and intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. METHODS: Ocular biometry was performed using IOLMaster laser interferometry. Predicted refractive outcomes before and after lens constant adjustment were compared to actual refractive outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean prediction (ME) and mean absolute errors (MAE) with standard deviations (±SD). RESULTS: Mean preoperative spherical equivalent was +5.44D ± 1.97D. Mean axial length was 21.20 mm ± 0.60 mm. Using standard IOL constants the MAE for Hoffer Q (0.62D, ±0.52D) and Holladay 1 (0.66D ± 0.52D) were significantly lower than SRK/T (MAE 0.91D ± 0.64D; P = <0.0005 and P = 0.001 respectively), but not Haigis (MAE 0.82D ± 0.83D, P = 0.071 and 0.22 respectively). MAEs for all formulae were significantly reduced by IOL constant adjustment (all P = <0.001). Following this there was no statistically significant difference in MAEs between formulae (range 0.50-0.57D, P = 0.57). Increasing MAE was significantly associated with reducing axial length and increasing IOL power for all formulae. For bilateral cases, prediction errors between eyes were significantly correlated across all formulae (all P = <0.0001) and explained 32-42% of the variance in prediction error between eyes. CONCLUSIONS: Prediction of postoperative refraction in patients with short axial lengths is challenging and at the limit of current, popular IOL formulae. There is now a clear need for prospective studies to assess latest generation IOL formulae such as Holladay 2 or Olsen in small eyes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Day et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: