Intraoperative aberrometry versus preoperative biometry for intraocular lens power selection in axial myopia. Issue 4 (April 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hill, Darren C.; Sudhakar, Shruti; Hill, Christopher S.; King, Tonya S.; Scott, Ingrid U.; Ernst, Brett B.; Pantanelli, Seth M.
• Is Part Of: Journal of cataract and refractive surgery. Volume 43:Issue 4(2017)
• Publication Date: 2017-04
• Subjects: 617.7
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.01.014
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0886-3350

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose : To compare the accuracy of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry (ORA) and the Hill‐radial basis function (RBF) formula with other formulas based on preoperative biometry in predicting residual refractive error after cataract surgery in eyes with axial myopia. Setting : Private practice, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA. Design : Retrospective consecutive case series. Methods : Eyes with an axial length (AL) greater than 25.0 mm had cataract extraction with intraocular lens implantation. For each eye, the 1‐center Wang‐Koch AL‐optimized Holladay 1 formula was used to select an IOL targeting emmetropia. Residual refractive error was predicted preoperatively using the SRK/T, Holladay 1 and 2, Barrett Universal II, and Hill‐RBF formulas and intraoperatively using wavefront aberrometry. The postoperative refraction was compared with the preoperative and intraoperative predictions. Results : The study comprised 37 patients (51 eyes). The mean numerical errors ± standard error associated with using the SRK/T, Holladay 1, AL‐optimized Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Barrett Universal II, and Hill‐RBF formulas and intraoperative wavefront aberrometry were 0.20 ± 0.06 diopters (D), 0.33 ± 0.06 D, −0.02 ± 0.06 D, 0.24 ± 0.06 D, 0.19 ± 0.06 D, 0.22 ± 0.06 D, and 0.056 ± 0.06 D, respectively ( P < .001). The proportion of patients within ±0.5 D of the predicted error was 74.5%, 62.8%, 82.4%, 79.1%, 73.9%, 76.7%, and 80.4%, respectively ( P = .090). Hyperopic outcomes occurred in 70.6%, 76.5%, 49.0%, 74.4%, 76.1%, 74.4%, and 45.1% of the eyes, respectively ( P = .007). Conclusions : Intraoperative wavefront aberrometry was better than all formulas based on preoperative biometry and as effective as the AL‐optimized Holladay 1 formula in predicting residual refractive error and reducing hyperopic outcomes. The Hill‐RBF formula's performance was similar to that of the fourth‐generation formulas.