Yang Soonwon, Park Chanjoon, Byun Yong-Soo, Chung So-Hyang, Kim Hyun Seung
Department of Ophthalmology, Eunpyeong St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Heliyon. 2024 Jun 20;10(13):e33339. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e33339. eCollection 2024 Jul 15.
This study aims to compare the accuracies of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas when targeting myopia versus emmetropia.
A total of 450 patients were included, with 225 patients targeting emmetropia and 225 patients aiming for approximately -2.0 diopters of myopia. This retrospective analysis utilized data from a single eye of each patient, with preoperative biometric measurements obtained using the IOL Master 700. The study considered established formulas such as Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, and SRK/T, as well as modern formulas including Barrett Universal II, Cooke K6, EVO 2.0, Hill-RBF, Hoffer QST, Kane, Olsen, and PEARL-DGS. Statistical analyses, including Friedman test and post hoc analysis, were employed to compare the accuracy of each IOL power calculation formula between the two groups. Additionally, a multiple regression analysis was conducted to identify variables influencing the accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation formulas.
In targeting myopia, all IOL formulas tended to exhibit a greater refractive error compared to when targeting emmetropic eyes. Notably, the Haigis, SRK/T, and Holladay 2 formulas were found to be highly influenced by this trend, while the modern formulas were less affected.
The accuracy of IOL power calculation formulas diminishes when targeting myopia in comparison to emmetropia. However, the modern formulas appear less susceptible to this trend. Consequently, when aiming for myopia, the use of the modern formulas is recommended for enhanced accuracy in IOL power calculation.
本研究旨在比较人工晶状体（IOL）屈光力计算公式在目标近视与正视眼时的准确性。
共纳入450例患者，其中225例患者目标为正视眼，225例患者目标为近视约-2.0屈光度。这项回顾性分析利用了每位患者单眼的数据，术前生物测量使用IOL Master 700获得。该研究考虑了Haigis、Hoffer Q、Holladay 1、Holladay 2和SRK/T等既定公式，以及包括Barrett Universal II、Cooke K6、EVO 2.0、Hill-RBF、Hoffer QST、Kane、Olsen和PEARL-DGS在内的现代公式。采用包括Friedman检验和事后分析在内的统计分析方法，比较两组中每个IOL屈光力计算公式的准确性。此外，还进行了多元回归分析，以确定影响人工晶状体屈光力计算公式准确性的变量。
在目标近视时，与目标正视眼相比，所有IOL公式的屈光不正往往更大。值得注意的是，发现Haigis、SRK/T和Holladay 2公式受此趋势影响较大，而现代公式受影响较小。
与正视眼相比，目标近视时IOL屈光力计算公式的准确性会降低。然而，现代公式似乎对此趋势不太敏感。因此，当目标为近视时，建议使用现代公式以提高IOL屈光力计算的准确性。
