Glyxambi
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 2995
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 67  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 484-489

Accuracy of the refractive prediction determined by intraocular lens power calculation formulas in high myopia


Department of Ophthalmology, The Third People's Hospital of Changzhou, Changzhou, Jiangsu Province, China, India

Correspondence Address:
Guohua Deng
Department of Ophthalmology, The Third People's Hospital of Changzhou, No. 300 North Lanling Road, Tianning District, Changzhou, Jiangsu Province, 213001
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_937_18

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: Our study was conducted to evaluate and compare the accuracy of the refractive prediction determined by the calculation formulas for different intraocular lens (IOL) powers for high myopia. Methods: This study reviewed 217 eyes from 135 patients who had received cataract aspiration treatment and IOL implantation. The refractive mean numerical error (MNE) and mean absolute error (MAE) of the IOL power calculation formulas (SRK/T, Haigis, Holladay, Hoffer Q, and Barrett Universal II) were examined and compared. The MNE and MAE at different axial lengths (AL) were compared, and the percentage of every refractive error absolute value for each formula was calculated at ±0.25D, ±0.50D, ±1.00D, and ±2.00D. Results: In all, 98 patients were recruited into this study and 98 eyes of them were analyzed. We found that Barrett Universal II formula had the lowest MNE and MAE, SRK/T and Haigis formulas arrived at similar MNE and MAE, and the MNE and MAE calculated by Holladay and Hoffer Q formula were the highest. Barrett Universal II formulas have the lowest MAE among different AL patients, whereas it reached the highest percentage of refractive error absolute value within 0.5D in this study. The MAE of each formula is positively correlated with AL. Conclusion: Barrett Universal II formula rendered the lowest predictive error compared with SRK/T, Haigis, Holladay, and Hoffer Q formulas. Thus, Barrett Universal II formula may be regarded as a more reliable formula for high myopia.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed740    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded198    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal