• X J Zhu, W W He, Y Du, D J Qian, J H Dai, and Y Lu.
• Department of Ophthalmology, Eye and Ear, Nose, and Throat Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai 200031, China.
• Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2017 Apr 11; 53 (4): 260-265.

AbstractObjective: To compare the accuracy of three different formulas for intraocular lens power calculation in high myopic eyes with cataract and analyze their influencial factors. Methods: One hundred and three high myopic patients of cataract (103 eyes), with average age of 60.2±8.8 years old (39.0-77.0), including 45 male and 54 female and with axial length ≥ 26 mm were enrolled in this retrospective case-series study. All of them underwent routine ocular examination and IOLMastermeasurement preoperatively and then underwent phacoemulsification through temporal clear-corneal incision with implantation of HumanOptic posterior chamber Intraocular lens (IOL). All analyses were conducted using SPSS version 19.0. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was applied to compare the refractive results one month postoperatively with the predicted IOL powers calculated by SRK/T, Holladay 1, or Haigis formula before surgery. The differences were further compared based on different grouping of axial length (AXL), corneal curvature (K) and corneal astigmatism (CA). The accuracies of the three formulas were analyzed using Bland-Altman analyses and the possible error sources of each formula were analyzed using multiple regression model. Results: The majority of patients enrolled had hyperopic shift after cataract surgery. The mean errors (ME) of the three formulas were SRK/T: 0.70±0.89D, Holladay 1: (1.20±0.88) D and Haigis: (0.60±0.88) D; the mean absolute errors (MAE) of the three formulas were (0.81±0.79) D, (1.23±0.84) D and (0.76±0.74) D, respectively. Both ME and MAE of Holladay formula were significantly greater than the other two formulas (F=86.31, P<0.01). Besides, the proportion of patients having a prediction error within 0.50 D was lower in those using Holladay formula (20.4%, 21/103) than the other two (SRK/T: 38.8%, 40/103, χ(2)=8.41, P<0.01, Haigis: 45.6%, 47/103, χ(2)=14.84, P<0.01). Bland-Altman analyses showed that the accuracies of all the three formulas were acceptable in patients of cataract with high myopia in clinical practice. ME and MAE tended to be larger with longer axial length, larger corneal curvature and astigmatism of the patients in all three formulas. However, in eyes with axial length> 30 mm or corneal curvature ≤43.00 D, the MAE of Haigis formula was lower than that of SRK/T formula (F=63.26,63.94, both P<0.01). The prediction error of SRK/T formula was positively correlated with axial length and corneal astigmatism (F=33.97, r=0.66, β=0.48, P<0.01 and β=0.42, P<0.01), while for Holladay and Haigis formulas, in addition to the previous two factors, the errors were also positively correlated with mean corneal curvature (Holladay 1: F=31.26, r=0.72, AXL: β=0.52, P<0.01, K: β=0.20, P<0.05 and CA: β=0.37, P<0.01; Haigis: F=30.96, r=0.72, AXL: β=0.33, P<0.01, K: β=0.40, P<0.01 and CA: β=0.37, P<0.01). Conclusions: In the selection of IOL formula for high myopic patients with cataract, Haigis or SRK/T would reduce the prediction error and serve as the more accurate formulas than Holladay 1. Haigis formula may be more accurate than SRK/T formula in case of AXL>30 mm or K≤43.00 D. (Chin J Ophthalmol, 2017, 53: 260-265).

33 keywords...

hide…