Comparison of IOL power calculation methods and intraoperative wavefront aberrometer in eyes after refractive surgery

Ana Paula Canto, Priyanka Chhadva, Florence Cabot, Anat Galor, Sonia H Yoo, Pravin K. Vaddavalli, William W Culbertson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare preoperative methods for calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power versus the intraoperative wavefront aberrometer in eyes with a history of refractive surgery. METHODS: A retrospective study of 46 eyes (33 patients) with previous refractive surgery that underwent subsequent cataract surgery was conducted. Suggested IOL power predicted by ORange intraoperative wavefront aberrometer (WaveTec Vision Systems, Inc., Aliso Viejo, CA) was compared to power predicted by the (1) SRK-T formula using keratometry and axial length measurements from the IOLMaster (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), (2) average central keratometry (Avg K) from corneal topography, and (3) average IOL power predicted by the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) web site. No historical information was used for the calculations. IOL power required for emmetropia was back-calculated using manifest refraction and implanted IOL power after cataract surgery. RESULTS: Mean age was 60 ± 7.9 years. Fifteen percent had a history of myopic photorefractive keratectomy (n = 7), 57% myopic LASIK (n = 26), 13% hyperopic LASIK (n = 6), and 22% radial keratectomy (RK) (n = 10). In 37% of cases, ORange predicted IOL power to within ±0.50 diopters (D) of emmetropia, compared to 30% for IOLMaster keratometry, 26% for Avg K, and 17% for ASCRS web site. In eyes after myopic treatment, ORange, IOLMaster, Avg K, and ASCRS web site predicted within ±0.50 D of emmetropia in 39%, 27%, 24%, and 18%, respectively, and within ±1.0 D in 60%, 39%, 39%, and 51%, respectively. In eyes after RK, ORange, Avg K, and ASCRS web site predicted to within ±0.50 D of emmetropia in 14% and the IOLMaster in 43% cases. CONCLUSIONS: Although the ORange most often predicted to within ±0.5 D of emmetropia, no method was able to achieve this accuracy more than 50% of the time. Predictions for eyes after RK were worse than for other types of refractive procedures.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)484-489
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Refractive Surgery
Volume29
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2013

Fingerprint

Refractive Surgical Procedures
Intraocular Lenses
Emmetropia
Cataract
Laser In Situ Keratomileusis
Corneal Topography
Photorefractive Keratectomy
Power (Psychology)
Retrospective Studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology
  • Surgery

Cite this

Comparison of IOL power calculation methods and intraoperative wavefront aberrometer in eyes after refractive surgery. / Canto, Ana Paula; Chhadva, Priyanka; Cabot, Florence; Galor, Anat; Yoo, Sonia H; Vaddavalli, Pravin K.; Culbertson, William W.

In: Journal of Refractive Surgery, Vol. 29, No. 7, 01.07.2013, p. 484-489.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1c78f570052b4360a226e9a32e6437c9,
title = "Comparison of IOL power calculation methods and intraoperative wavefront aberrometer in eyes after refractive surgery",
abstract = "PURPOSE: To compare preoperative methods for calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power versus the intraoperative wavefront aberrometer in eyes with a history of refractive surgery. METHODS: A retrospective study of 46 eyes (33 patients) with previous refractive surgery that underwent subsequent cataract surgery was conducted. Suggested IOL power predicted by ORange intraoperative wavefront aberrometer (WaveTec Vision Systems, Inc., Aliso Viejo, CA) was compared to power predicted by the (1) SRK-T formula using keratometry and axial length measurements from the IOLMaster (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), (2) average central keratometry (Avg K) from corneal topography, and (3) average IOL power predicted by the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) web site. No historical information was used for the calculations. IOL power required for emmetropia was back-calculated using manifest refraction and implanted IOL power after cataract surgery. RESULTS: Mean age was 60 ± 7.9 years. Fifteen percent had a history of myopic photorefractive keratectomy (n = 7), 57{\%} myopic LASIK (n = 26), 13{\%} hyperopic LASIK (n = 6), and 22{\%} radial keratectomy (RK) (n = 10). In 37{\%} of cases, ORange predicted IOL power to within ±0.50 diopters (D) of emmetropia, compared to 30{\%} for IOLMaster keratometry, 26{\%} for Avg K, and 17{\%} for ASCRS web site. In eyes after myopic treatment, ORange, IOLMaster, Avg K, and ASCRS web site predicted within ±0.50 D of emmetropia in 39{\%}, 27{\%}, 24{\%}, and 18{\%}, respectively, and within ±1.0 D in 60{\%}, 39{\%}, 39{\%}, and 51{\%}, respectively. In eyes after RK, ORange, Avg K, and ASCRS web site predicted to within ±0.50 D of emmetropia in 14{\%} and the IOLMaster in 43{\%} cases. CONCLUSIONS: Although the ORange most often predicted to within ±0.5 D of emmetropia, no method was able to achieve this accuracy more than 50{\%} of the time. Predictions for eyes after RK were worse than for other types of refractive procedures.",
author = "Canto, {Ana Paula} and Priyanka Chhadva and Florence Cabot and Anat Galor and Yoo, {Sonia H} and Vaddavalli, {Pravin K.} and Culbertson, {William W}",
year = "2013",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3928/1081597X-20130617-07",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "484--489",
journal = "Journal of Refractive Surgery",
issn = "1081-597X",
publisher = "Slack Incorporated",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of IOL power calculation methods and intraoperative wavefront aberrometer in eyes after refractive surgery

AU - Canto, Ana Paula

AU - Chhadva, Priyanka

AU - Cabot, Florence

AU - Galor, Anat

AU - Yoo, Sonia H

AU - Vaddavalli, Pravin K.

AU - Culbertson, William W

PY - 2013/7/1

Y1 - 2013/7/1

N2 - PURPOSE: To compare preoperative methods for calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power versus the intraoperative wavefront aberrometer in eyes with a history of refractive surgery. METHODS: A retrospective study of 46 eyes (33 patients) with previous refractive surgery that underwent subsequent cataract surgery was conducted. Suggested IOL power predicted by ORange intraoperative wavefront aberrometer (WaveTec Vision Systems, Inc., Aliso Viejo, CA) was compared to power predicted by the (1) SRK-T formula using keratometry and axial length measurements from the IOLMaster (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), (2) average central keratometry (Avg K) from corneal topography, and (3) average IOL power predicted by the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) web site. No historical information was used for the calculations. IOL power required for emmetropia was back-calculated using manifest refraction and implanted IOL power after cataract surgery. RESULTS: Mean age was 60 ± 7.9 years. Fifteen percent had a history of myopic photorefractive keratectomy (n = 7), 57% myopic LASIK (n = 26), 13% hyperopic LASIK (n = 6), and 22% radial keratectomy (RK) (n = 10). In 37% of cases, ORange predicted IOL power to within ±0.50 diopters (D) of emmetropia, compared to 30% for IOLMaster keratometry, 26% for Avg K, and 17% for ASCRS web site. In eyes after myopic treatment, ORange, IOLMaster, Avg K, and ASCRS web site predicted within ±0.50 D of emmetropia in 39%, 27%, 24%, and 18%, respectively, and within ±1.0 D in 60%, 39%, 39%, and 51%, respectively. In eyes after RK, ORange, Avg K, and ASCRS web site predicted to within ±0.50 D of emmetropia in 14% and the IOLMaster in 43% cases. CONCLUSIONS: Although the ORange most often predicted to within ±0.5 D of emmetropia, no method was able to achieve this accuracy more than 50% of the time. Predictions for eyes after RK were worse than for other types of refractive procedures.

AB - PURPOSE: To compare preoperative methods for calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power versus the intraoperative wavefront aberrometer in eyes with a history of refractive surgery. METHODS: A retrospective study of 46 eyes (33 patients) with previous refractive surgery that underwent subsequent cataract surgery was conducted. Suggested IOL power predicted by ORange intraoperative wavefront aberrometer (WaveTec Vision Systems, Inc., Aliso Viejo, CA) was compared to power predicted by the (1) SRK-T formula using keratometry and axial length measurements from the IOLMaster (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), (2) average central keratometry (Avg K) from corneal topography, and (3) average IOL power predicted by the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) web site. No historical information was used for the calculations. IOL power required for emmetropia was back-calculated using manifest refraction and implanted IOL power after cataract surgery. RESULTS: Mean age was 60 ± 7.9 years. Fifteen percent had a history of myopic photorefractive keratectomy (n = 7), 57% myopic LASIK (n = 26), 13% hyperopic LASIK (n = 6), and 22% radial keratectomy (RK) (n = 10). In 37% of cases, ORange predicted IOL power to within ±0.50 diopters (D) of emmetropia, compared to 30% for IOLMaster keratometry, 26% for Avg K, and 17% for ASCRS web site. In eyes after myopic treatment, ORange, IOLMaster, Avg K, and ASCRS web site predicted within ±0.50 D of emmetropia in 39%, 27%, 24%, and 18%, respectively, and within ±1.0 D in 60%, 39%, 39%, and 51%, respectively. In eyes after RK, ORange, Avg K, and ASCRS web site predicted to within ±0.50 D of emmetropia in 14% and the IOLMaster in 43% cases. CONCLUSIONS: Although the ORange most often predicted to within ±0.5 D of emmetropia, no method was able to achieve this accuracy more than 50% of the time. Predictions for eyes after RK were worse than for other types of refractive procedures.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84879892946&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84879892946&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3928/1081597X-20130617-07

DO - 10.3928/1081597X-20130617-07

M3 - Article

C2 - 23820231

AN - SCOPUS:84879892946

VL - 29

SP - 484

EP - 489

JO - Journal of Refractive Surgery

JF - Journal of Refractive Surgery

SN - 1081-597X

IS - 7

ER -