Accuracy of 7 intraocular lens power calculation formulas in primary angle-closure glaucoma eyes, according to axial length and anterior chamber depth
Abstract Purpose To assess the impact of Axial Length (AL) and anterior chamber depth (ACD) on the performance of the Kane, EVO 2.0, Barrett Universal II (BU II), SRK/T, Haigis, Holladay 2 and Hoffer Q formulas when calculating intraocular lens power in primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG) patients...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2025-07-01
|
| Series: | BMC Ophthalmology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-025-04238-x |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Abstract Purpose To assess the impact of Axial Length (AL) and anterior chamber depth (ACD) on the performance of the Kane, EVO 2.0, Barrett Universal II (BU II), SRK/T, Haigis, Holladay 2 and Hoffer Q formulas when calculating intraocular lens power in primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG) patients. Setting Eye hospital, Wen Zhou Medical University, Zhejiang, China. Design Retrospective, consecutive case series. Methods Patients who underwent cataract surgery diagnosed with PACG or not were included. The main outcome measures comprised mean prediction error (ME), mean absolute refractive error (MAE), median absolute refractive error (MedAE). Additionally, the proportions of eyes with postoperative refractive errors within ± 0.25 diopter (D), ± 0.50 D, ± 0.75 D, and ± 1.00 D were calculated. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on AL and ACD. Results A total of 116 eyes were included, with 66 in the PACG group and 50 in the control group. The PACG group showed significantly larger MAEs compared to the control group. In PACG eyes, the BUII formula tends to cause negative residual refractive errors, while the Kane, EVO, and Holladay 2 formulas often lead to positive ones (P < 0.01). Notably, the SRK/T and Haigis formulas demonstrated better predictability for ME (P < 0.01). PACG patients with an AL under 22 mm or an ACD under 2.5 mm have lower IOL power calculation predictability (P < 0.05). Subgroup analysis shows that PACG eyes with both AL under 22 mm and ACD under 2.5 mm have the lowest predictability and are most prone to significant prediction errors (P < 0.05). A negative correlation was found between postoperative prediction error and AL. Conclusions PACG eyes showed lower prediction accuracy, especially in short ALs and shallow ACD cases. SRK/T and Haigis formulas had better ME predictability. The study stresses optimizing IOL power calculation formulas for PACG eyes, considering AL and ACD effects. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1471-2415 |