A No-History Multi-Formula Approach to Improve the IOL Power Calculation after Laser Refractive Surgery: Preliminary Results

The impact of corneal higher-order aberrations on dynamic visual acuity post cataract surgery

Purpose

To explore the influence of corneal higher-order aberrations (HOAs) on dynamic visual acuity (DVA) post cataract surgery.

Methods

A total of 27 patients with 45 eyes following cataract surgery were included in this study. The postoperative monocular object-moving DVA at the velocity of 20, 40, and 80 degrees per second (dps) were examined at 1 month. The total corneal HOAs were measured with Scheimpflug-based corneal topography. The correlation between postoperative DVA and HOAs was analyzed.

Results

Significant difference was shown among DVA at different velocities (P < 0.001). The 20 dps DVA was significantly better than 40 (P < 0.001) and 80 (P < 0.001) dps DVA. No significant difference was observed between 40 and 80 dps DVA (P = 0.420). The vertical coma and the root mean square (RMS) of coma (RMScoma) were statistically correlated with 80 dps DVA (P < 0.05). The vertical trefoil, RMStrefoil and total RMSHOA were statistically correlated with 40 and 80 dps DVA (P < 0.05). The spherical aberration was not significantly associated with postoperative DVA (P > 0.05 for all velocites). The multivariate linear regression model revealed that age was a significant influential factor for 20 dps DVA (P = 0.002), and RMStrefoil (4 mm) and age were significantly associated with 40 and 80 dps DVA (P ≤ 0.01).

Conclusion

The research demonstrated that larger corneal HOAs, especially coma and trefoil aberrations were significantly associated with worse high-speed DVA, but not spherical aberration post cataract surgery.

A Two-Decade Bibliometric Analysis of Laser in Ophthalmology: From Past to Present

Background

Laser therapy has been proven as an effective technique for managing ophthalmological disorders. To guide future research, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of laser applications in eye diseases from 1990 to 2022, aiming to identify key themes and trends.

Methods

We retrieved 3027 publications from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC). Bibliometrix was used for science mapping of the literature, while VOSviewer and CiteSpace were applied to visualize co-authorship, co-citation, co-occurrence, and bibliographic coupling networks.

Results

From a co-citation reference network, we identified 52 distinct clusters. Our analysis uncovered three main research trends. The first trend revolves around the potential evolution of corneal laser surgery techniques, shifting from the treatment of refractive errors to broader applications in biomedical optics. The second trend illustrates the advancement of laser applications in treating a range of disorders, from retinal and ocular surface diseases to glaucoma. The third trend focuses on the innovative uses of established technologies.

Conclusion

This study offers significant insights into the evolution of laser applications in ophthalmology over the past 30 years, which will undoubtedly assist scientists in directing further research in this promising field.

Current Concepts and Recent Updates of Optical Biometry- A Comprehensive Review

One of the most recent advancements in the field of cataract surgery is optical biometry. With the advent of optical biometry ocular measurements are now simpler, quicker, and more precise. The devices have made intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations easier in difficult situations too, such as in cases with extremes of axial lengths, silicone filled eyes, cataract surgery in post-keratoplasty eyes, post Laser-Assisted in Situ Keratomileusis (LASIK) eyes, etc. The gold standard for IOL power calculation in the present day is by the use of optical biometry devices. The anatomical measurements by these devices are highly precise and because of these measurements and the incorporation of various IOL power calculation formulas the optical biometry devices give the accurate power and the post-operative visual outcome is highly satisfactory among the patients. The growing use of these devices has made cataract the most commonly performed refractive surgical procedure nowadays. In the current scenario, optical biometry has widespread acceptance in almost all countries and has many advantages over ultrasound or immersion biometry. Cataract surgeons can obtain easy and reliable measurements from these devices. Refractive surprises have also decreased considerably with their use. This article will comprehensively review the principles of the various optical biometry devices, the parameters used in each of the devices, the advantages and disadvantages, and add more like what all this article will add.

Accuracy of toric intraocular lens power calculation depending on different keratometry values using a novel network based software platform

Purpose

To compare different corneal keratometry readings (swept-source-OCT-assisted biometry and Scheimpflug imaging) with a novel software platform for calculation of toric intraocular lenses.

Setting

Department of Ophthalmology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.

Design

Retrospective, non-randomized, clinical trial.

Methods

Twenty-three eyes undergoing toric intraocular lens implantation were included. Inclusion criteria were preoperative regular corneal astigmatism of at least 1.00 D, no previous refractive surgery, no ocular surface diseases and no maculopathies. Lens exchange was performed with CALLISTO eye (Zeiss). For each patient, the expected postoperative residual refraction was calculated depending on three different corneal parameters of two different devices: standard K-front (K) and total keratometry (TK) obtained by a swept-source-OCT-assisted biometry system (IOL Master 700, Zeiss) as well as total corneal refractive power (TCRP) obtained by a Scheimpflug device (Pentacam AXL, Oculus). Barrett's formula for toric intraocular lenses was used for all calculations within a novel software platform (EQ workplace, Zeiss FORUM®). Results were statistically compared with postoperative refraction calculated according to the Harris dioptric power matrix.

Results

The standard K values (mean PE 0.02 D ± 0.45 D) and TK values (mean PE 0.09 D ± 0.43 D) of the IOL Master 700 reached similar results (p = 0.96). 78% of eyes in both K and TK groups achieved SE within ±0.5 D of attempted correction and all eyes (100%) were within ±1.0 D of attempted correction in both groups. By contrast, the prediction error in the IOL calculation using the TCRP of the Scheimpflug device was significantly greater (mean PE -0.56 D ± 0.49 D; p = 0.00 vs. standard K and p = 0.00 vs. TK) with adjusted refractive indices. Thirty-nine and Ninety-one percentage of eyes in the TCRP group achieved SE within ±0.5 D (p = 0.008 K vs. TCRP and p = 0.005 TK vs. TCRP) and ± 1.0 D (p = 0.14 vs. TCRP) of attempted correction, respectively.

Conclusion

All three corneal parameters (standard K, TK, TCRP) performed well in calculating toric IOLs. The most accurate refractive outcomes in toric IOL implantation were achieved by IOL calculations based on swept-source-OCT-assisted biometry. The SS-OCT-based K-front and TK values achieve comparable results in the calculation of toric IOLs.

A Review of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas Based on Artificial Intelligence

PURPOSE

The proper selection of an intraocular lens power calculation formula is an essential aspect of cataract surgery. This study evaluated the accuracy of artificial intelligence-based formulas.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

This review comprises articles evaluating the exactness of artificial intelligence-based formulas published from 2017 to July 2023. The papers were identified by a literature search of various databases (Pubmed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Crossref, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and SciELO) using the terms "IOL formulas", "FullMonte", "Ladas", "Hill-RBF", "PEARL-DGS", "Kane", "Karmona", "Hoffer QST", and "Nallasamy". In total, 25 peer-reviewed articles in English with the maximum sample and the largest number of compared formulas were examined.

RESULTS

The scores of the mean absolute error and percentage of patients within ±0.5 D and ±1.0 D were used to estimate the exactness of the formulas. In most studies the Kane formula obtained the smallest mean absolute error and the highest percentage of patients within ±0.5 D and ±1.0 D. Second place was typically achieved by the PEARL DGS formula. The limitations of the studies were also discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Kane seems to be the most accurate artificial intelligence-based formula. PEARL DGS also gives very good results. Hoffer QST, Karmona, and Nallasamy are the newest, and need further evaluation.

Influence of Ocular Biometry Parameters on the Predictive Accuracy of IOL Power Formulas in Patients with High Myopia

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of ocular biometry parameters on the predictive accuracy of 10 intraocular lens (IOL) power formulas in patients with high myopia (HM).

METHODS

We analyzed 202 eyes of 202 patients. The ocular biometry was determined preoperatively using an IOLMaster 700. The associations between the biometry parameters and the prediction error (PE) 1 month postoperatively were assessed. HM was defined as an axial length exceeding 26.50 mm.

RESULTS

In patients with HM (n = 108), the K6, Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO), Olsen, and Barrett Universal II (BUII) formulas had the lowest absolute PEs among the 10 formulas. The ocular biometry parameters were not associated with the PE of K6, EVO, Olsen, or BUII. A longer axial length in HM eyes was associated with myopic outcomes by Kane, Hoffer QST, and VRF and hyperopic outcomes by Holladay 2 and T2. Steeper keratometry, a deeper anterior chamber, and a thicker lens were associated with a hyperopic shift in HM eyes when using VRF, Kane, and Hoffer QST, respectively. In patients without HM (n = 94), there was no difference between the formulas in absolute PE. The significant associations between the biometry parameters and PE in patients with HM were not present in patients without HM.

CONCLUSIONS

K6, EVO, Olsen, and BUII displayed high accuracy in HM eyes and were not influenced by preoperative biometry parameters. For the remaining formulas, the preoperative keratometry, anterior chamber depth, lens thickness, and axial length were possible error sources underlying an inaccurate IOL power prediction in patients with HM.

Comparative Analysis of the Visual, Refractive and Aberrometric Outcome with the Use of 2 Intraocular Refractive Segment Multifocal Lenses

To demonstrate the results of ray tracing higher- and lower-order aberrations in pseudophakic eyes with rotationally asymmetrical segment multifocal lenses, total high- and low-order aberrations, measured by root mean square value (RMS), refraction, uncorrected distance and uncorrected near visual acuity (UCDVA and UCNVA), and tear break-up time, were measured at scotopic size in 42 eyes of patients implanted with bifocal refractive Mplus15/Mplus30 IOL with +1.5 dpt near addition (42 eyes of patients implanted with Mplus15)/+3.0 dpt near addition (91 eyes of patients implanted with Mplus30), and 107 eyes of control group. No significant differences were noticed between the examined groups concerning UCDVA, UCNVA, and tear break-up time (p < 0.001). Coma and total high-order aberrations were significantly higher for the Mplus30 lens in comparison to the Mplus15 lens and the control group (Coma, Trefoil p < 0.001, Secondary Astigmatism p = 0.002). The spherical aberrations were significantly higher in the lower-addition lens (p = 0.016) in comparison to the control group and to the higher-addition lens group (p < 0.001). Both intraocular lens models were successful at reaching refractive aim, good distance, and near function with the lower higher-order aberrations for the low-addition lens.

Comparison of dynamic visual acuity after implantation of toric bifocal or trifocal intraocular lens in age-related cataract patients: a randomized controlled trial

Purpose

To investigate the dynamic visual acuity (DVA) after implantation of toric bifocal or trifocal intraocular lens in age-related cataract patients.

Methods

This was a prospective randomized controlled trial. Of one hundred and twenty-four patients enrolled and randomized to receive unilateral phacoemulsification and toric trifocal (939 M/MP, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany) or toric bifocal (909 M, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany) intraocular lenses (IOL) implantation, ninety-nine patients completed the follow-up and were included in final analysis. Postoperatively, uncorrected and corrected distance (UDVA and CDVA), intermediate (UIVA and DCIVA) and near (UNVA and DCNVA) static visual acuity, manifest refraction and uncorrected and corrected distance DVA (UDDVA and CDDVA) at 20, 40 and 80 degrees per second (dps) were evaluated at one week, one month and three months.

Results

Three months postoperatively, the UDVA were 0.13 ± 0.11 and 0.14 ± 0.13 in the toric trifocal and bifocal IOL group, respectively. Significant better UIVA (trifocal, 0.17 ± 0.13 vs. bifocal, 0.23 ± 0.13, p = 0.037) and DCIVA (trifocal, 0.16 ± 0.11 vs. bifocal, 0.20 ± 0.12, p = 0.048) were observed in patients implanting toric trifocal than bifocal IOL at three months postoperatively. Patients implanted with toric bifocal IOL obtained better CDDVA at 80 dps (0.5607 ± 0.2032) than the trifocal group (0.6573 ± 0.2450, p = 0.039) at three months. Postoperative UDDVA and CDDVA at 20, 40 and 80 dps were significantly associated with age (p < 0.05, respectively) and postoperative static visual acuity (p < 0.05, respectively).

Conclusion

Toric trifocal IOL provides better static intermediate visual acuity, and toric bifocal IOL implantation provides better distance dynamic visual acuity at high speed.

Accuracy of the VRF and VRF-G Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas Using Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometry

Purpose

To collate the accuracy of two recently introduced intraocular lens (IOL) formulas (VRF and VRF-G) in cataract patients using a swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) biometry (IOL Master 700, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany).

Patients and Methods

Data records of 295 eyes from 295 patients were included in this scrutiny. The IOLMaster 700 SS-OCT biometer was used for biometric measurements. The VRF and VRF-G formulas were compared with seven 3rd and 4th generation thin and thick-lens formulas: Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, SRK/T, T2, and Barrett Universal II. With optimized lens constants, the mean prediction error (PE) and its standard deviation (SD), the median absolute error (MedAE), the mean absolute error (MAE), and the percentage of eyes with PEs within ±0.25 D, ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, ±1.00 D, and <±2.00 D were analyzed.

Results

Statistically significant differences were found between formulas in the whole group (Friedman test, P = 0.000). The VRF-G and Haigis formulas showed the lowest SD values (0.464 D and 0.466 D respectively). The VRF and Barrett Universal II formulas were less predictable (SD 0.471 D and SD 0.474 D respectively). The biggest proportion of eyes within ±0.50 D was found with VRF-G (76.27%), Haigis (75.59%), VRF (74.92%), and Barrett Universal II (74.92%) formulas.

Conclusion

Based on data achieved from the SS-OCT biometry, the VRF-G and Haigis methods were the more precise predictors of postoperative refraction with the biggest proportion of eyes within ±0.50 D.

Evaluation of Tropicamide-Phenylephrine Mydriatic Eye Drop Instillation on Choroidal Thickness

The purpose of this study is to evaluate choroidal thickness (ChT) at the subfoveal and peripheral level after the instillation of 0.5% tropicamide + 10% phenylephrine 9 hydrochloride eye drops by using OCT scans in enhanced depth image (EDI) mode. In total, 53 patients (30 males and 23 females) were involved, and the mean age was 25.62 ± 2.41 (age range: 23-36). The dominant eye was treated with tropicamide + phenylephrine (Visumidriatic Fenil 100 mg/mL + 5 mg/mL, Visufarma) while the nondominant eye was used as the control. An OCT analysis was performed on both eyes before and 30 min after the instillation of a drop of mydriatic in the dominant eye. The ChT was measured by using the OCT software measurement tool (Spectralis; Heidelberg Engineering; Heidelberg, Germany, version 6.0). The results showed a statistically significant ChT decrease (p = 0.009) in the temporal sector after the treatment with tropicamide + phenylephrine. In the subfoveal and nasal sectors, no statistically significant ChT changes were detected (p = 0.94; p = 0.85) following the administration of the mydriatic eye drops. The ChT thinning in the temporal sector following the instillation of the tropicamide + phenylephrine eye drops suggests that in the case of ChT studies, mydriatic administration should be avoided.

Challenges of refractive cataract surgery in the era of myopia epidemic: a mini-review

Myopia is the leading cause of visual impairment in the world. With ever-increasing prevalence in these years, it creates an alarming global epidemic. In addition to the difficulty in seeing distant objects, myopia also increases the risk of cataract and advances its onset, greatly affecting the productivity of myopes of working age. Cataract management in myopic eyes, especially highly myopic eyes is originally more complicated than that in normal eyes, whereas the growing population of cataract with myopia, increasing popularity of corneal and lens based refractive surgery, and rising demand for spectacle independence after cataract surgery all further pose unprecedented challenges to ophthalmologists. Previous history of corneal refractive surgery and existence of implantable collamer lens will both affect the accuracy of biometry including measurement of corneal curvature and axial length before cataract surgery, which may result in larger intraocular lens (IOL) power prediction errors and a compromise in the surgical outcome especially in a refractive cataract surgery. A prudent choice of formula for cataract patients with different characteristics is essential in improving this condition. Besides, the characteristics of myopic eyes might affect the long-term stability of IOL, which is important for the maintenance of visual outcomes especially after the implantation of premium IOLs, thus a proper selection of IOL accordingly is crucial. In this mini-review, we provide an overview of the impact of myopia epidemic on treatment for cataract and to discuss new challenges that surgeons may encounter in the foreseeable future when planning refractive cataract surgery for myopic patients.

Intraocular Pressure Variations in Postural Changes: Comparison between Obese and Non-Obese Controls

BACKGROUND

Comparing intraocular pressure (IOP) changes (ΔIOP) between obese subjects and non-obese controls in relation to different positions: standing, sitting, supine.

METHODS

the IOP was measured in both obese patients and non-obese controls groups with Tono-Pen AVIA in different positions following this sequence: after 5 min (5') in the standing position, sitting, supine, supine after 5 min (supine 5') and immediately after standing. ΔIOP values obtained comparing all positions were, therefore, evaluated.

RESULTS

92 eyes of 46 obese subjects aged between 18 and 59 years (mean 38.07 ± 11.51 years) and of a Body Mass Index (BMI) between 31.84 and 60.65 (mean 41.84 ± 7.05) were evaluated. A total of 48 eyes of 24 non-obese controls aged between 23 and 55 (mean 35.21 ± 11.96 years) and of a BMI between 18.20 and 26.79 (mean 21.04 ± 2.36) were also recruited. In obese subjects, there were statistically significant differences between the IOP in the supine position and the supine positions 5' with all other IOP measurements (p < 0.05). There were statistically significant differences between ΔIOP in both supine positions and prolonged standing positions obtained by obese subjects and non-obese controls (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In obese subjects, there is a statistically significant increase in IOP in the supine positions that is significantly greater than the non-obese population. BMI is weakly correlated with IOP and ΔIOP in postural changes.

Comparing the Accuracy of the Kane, Barrett Universal II, Hill-Radial Basis Function, Emmetropia Verifying Optical, and Ladas Super Formula Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas

Purpose

To assess the accuracy of five new-generation intraocular lens (IOL) power formulas: Barrett Universal II (BUII), Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) Formula, Hill-Radial Basis Function (Hill-RBF), Kane Formula, and Ladas Super Formula (LSF).

Patients and Methods

This is a retrospective single-surgeon study from a refractive clinic and clinical research center in Draper, UT, USA. The primary outcome measures were mean absolute error (MAE) and median absolute error (MedAE). Secondary outcome measures were the standard deviation (SD) of each formula's refractive prediction errors (RPE) and the percentage of eyes within ±0.50D. Refractive predictions were compared to the postoperative spherical equivalent to determine the RPE for each formula. RPEs were optimized, and MAE, MedAE, SD of the AME, and percent of eyes achieving RPEs within the specified ranges of ±0.125 D, ±0.25 D, ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, ±1.0 D were calculated. Subgroup analysis between different axial lengths was attempted but yielded insufficient statistical power to draw meaningful conclusions.

Results

A total of 103 eyes of 103 patients were included in our study after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria to 606 eyes from 2019 to 2021. Formulas ranked in ascending order by MAE were Kane, EVO, BUII, Hill-RBF, and LSF. The ascending rankings of MedAE were Kane, BUII, Hill-RBF, EVO, Ladas. Kane had a significantly lower MAE than Hill-RBF (p<0.001). EVO had the lowest SD of AMEs and the highest percentage of eyes within ±0.50 D. According to heteroscedastic testing, EVO also had a statistically significant lower SD than Hill-RBF.

Conclusion

Kane was the most accurate formula in terms of MAE and MedAE. EVO and BUII achieved marginally higher MAEs than Kane, suggesting these three formulas are comparable in performance. With the exception EVO and Hill-RBF, the heteroscedastic test yielded no significant differences in SD between the formulas. Although there were multiple statistically significant differences between the formulas in terms of MAE, MedAE, and SD, these differences may not be appreciable clinically. Lastly, there were no statistically significant differences in the percent of eyes with RPEs within ±0.50 D, suggesting similar clinical performance between formulas.