Comparison of Legacy and New No-History IOL Power Calculation Formulas in Postmyopic Laser Vision Correction Eyes

被引：7

作者：

Anter, Abdelrahman M. ^{[1
]}

Bleeker, Adam R. ^{[2
]}

Shammas, H. John ^{[3
,4
]}

Suraneni, Sanjana ^{[1
]}

Kingrey, Brandon ^{[2
]}

Murphy, David A. ^{[2
]}

Leal, Sebastian ^{[1
]}

Ghalibafan, Seyyedehfatemeh ^{[1
]}

Tonk, Rahul S. ^{[1
]}

Cooke, David L. ^{[5
,6
]}

Riaz, Kamran M. ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Univ Miami, Bascom Palmer Eye Inst, Miami, FL USA

[2] Univ Oklahoma, Dean McGee Eye Inst, Oklahoma City, OK 73104 USA

[3] Univ Southem Calif, Keck Sch Med, Dept Ophthalmol, Los Angeles, CA USA

[4] Shammas Eye Med Ctr, Lynwood, CA USA

[5] Great Lakes Eye Care, St Joseph, MI USA

[6] Michigan State Univ, Coll Osteopath Med, Dept Neurol & Ophthalmol, E Lansing, MI USA

来源：

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY | 2024年 / 264卷

关键词：

INTRAOPERATIVE ABERROMETRY; ACCURACY; SURGERY;

D O I：

10.1016/j.ajo.2024.03.014

中图分类号：

R77 [眼科学];

学科分类号：

100212 ;

摘要：

Purpose: To compare the refractive accuracy of legacy and new no-history formulas in eyes with previous myopic laser vision correction (M-LVC). Design: Retrospective cohort study. Methods: Setting: Two academic centers Study Population: 576 eyes (400 patients) with previous M-LVC that underwent cataract surgery between 2019-2023. A SS-OCT biometer was used to obtain biometric measurements, including standard (K), posterior (PK), and total keratometry values (TK).Observation Procedures: Refractive prediction errors were calculated for 11 no-history formulas: two legacy M-LVC formulas, four new M-LVC formulas using K values only, and five new M-LVC formulas using K with PK or TK. Main Outcome Measures: Heteroscedastic testing was used to evaluate relative formula performance, and formulas were ranked by root mean square error (RMSE). Results: New M-LVC formulas performed better than legacy M-LVC formulas. New M-LVC formulas with PK/TK values performed better than versions without PK/TK values. Among new M-LVC formulas with PK/TK values, EVO 2.0-PK was superior to Hoffer QST-PK (P < 0.005). Among new M-LVC formulas using K only, Pearl DGS-K and EVO 2.0-K were both superior to Hoffer QST-K and Barrett True K NH-K formulas (all P < 0.005). Conclusions: Surgeons should favor using new no-history post M-LVC formulas over legacy post M-LVC formulas whenever possible. The top-performing M-LVC formulas (EVO 2.0-PK, Pearl DGS-PK, and Barrett True K-TK) utilized posterior corneal power values. Among formulas utilizing K alone, the EVO 2.0-K and Pearl DGS-K performed best. (c) 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

引用

页码：44 / 52

页数：9