Guoji Yanke Zazhi (Jan 2025)

Accuracy comparison of different calculation formulas for intraocular lens degree in cataract patients with short axial length under different biometric parameters

  • Xia Yang,
  • Lin Yunxia,
  • Xu Ling

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3980/j.issn.1672-5123.2025.1.20
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 25, no. 1
pp. 112 – 117

Abstract

Read online

AIM: To compare the refractive prediction accuracy of 7 intraocular lens(IOL)calculation formulas in the cataract eyes with short axial length(AL)at different corneal curvatures and anterior chamber depth(ACD), and analyze relevant influencing factors contributing to prediction errors.METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed for 125 patients(125 eyes)with a short AL, who received cataract phacoemulsification at Shenyang He Eye Specialist Hospital from November 2020 to December 2021. According to the keratometry(Km), they were divided into low flat Km group(≤45.5 D), medium and high Km group(45.5 D<Km<47 D)and steep Km group(≥47 D); and they were divided into extremely shallow anterior chamber group(≤2.09 mm), shallow anterior chamber group(2.09 mm<ACD<2.58 mm)and normal deep anterior chamber group(≥2.58 mm)according to the ACD. And then the median absolute error(MedAE)of EVO, KANE, Barrett Universal Ⅱ, SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay I, and Haigis formulas was calculated and compared, and the correlation between various parameters and prediction error was analyzed.RESULTS: There was a significant difference in the absolute prediction error of each formula(χ2=49.934, P<0.001)in the overall comparative analysis, and the MedAE of the Barrett Universal Ⅱ formula was the smallest(0.17 D). There were significant statistical differences in the middle-high and steep Km groups(χ2=34.372, 34.804, all P<0.001), and the MedAE(0.14 D; 0.20 D)of the Barrett Universal Ⅱ formula was the smallest. The absolute prediction error of the 3 ACD subgroups was statistically significant(χ2=22.863, 25.568, 13.647, all P<0.05), and the MedAE(0.27 D; 0.15 D; 0.16 D)of the Barrett Universal Ⅱ formula was the smallest. Multiple linear regression analysis showed that Km, AL, and the IOL degree were important correlated factor leading to postoperative prediction error.CONCLUSION: The accuracy of the Barrett Universal Ⅱ formula was higher in the short AL population under different biometric parameters, and AL, Km and IOL degree are closely related to the prediction accuracy.

Keywords