scholarly journals Changes in Anterior Chamber Depth after Phacoemulsification in Pseudoexfoliative Eyes and their Effect on Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 255-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sirel Gür Güngör ◽  
Ahmet Akman ◽  
Leyla Asena ◽  
Mustafa Aksoy ◽  
Almila Sarıgül Sezenöz
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Chamber ◽  
Intraocular Lens ◽  
Anterior Chamber Depth ◽  
Power Calculation ◽  
Intraocular Lens Power Calculation ◽  
Intraocular Lens Power ◽  
Lens Power ◽  
Lens Power Calculation

Quantitative biometric cutoffs for the choice of the intraocular lens power calculation formula for a recently introduced nondiffractive extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens

2021 ◽  
pp. 112067212110655
Author(s):  
Alessandro Arrigo ◽  
Gianpiera Gambaro ◽  
Francesco Fasce ◽  
Emanuela Aragona ◽  
Innocente Figini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Chamber ◽  
Intraocular Lens ◽  
Axial Length ◽  
Anterior Chamber Depth ◽  
Power Calculation ◽  
Calculation Formula ◽  
Intraocular Lens Power Calculation ◽  
Intraocular Lens Power ◽  
Lens Power ◽  
Lens Power Calculation

Purpose This study aimed to analyze biometry values cutoffs for the choice of the best intraocular lens power calculation formula for AcrySof IQ Vivity intraocular lens. Methods The study was designed as interventional case series with 3 months of follow-up. Intraocular lens power calculation formulas included Barrett Universal II and SRK/T. The first was adopted for the intraocular lens power choice. The quantitative analysis focused on the identification of specific biometric cutoffs considering axial length, anterior chamber depth, and corneal powers. We included only the dominant eye in the statistical analysis. Results One hundred and eight eyes of 54 patients (23 males; mean age 62 ± 5 years) with no ocular diseases were included. Best-corrected visual acuity improved from 0.3 ± 0.2 to 0.0 ± 0.0 logMAR. All the eyes reached spectacles-free far and intermediate visions; a spherical addition of + 1.0D was necessary to adjust near vision. We identified significant quantitative cutoffs based on axial length and anterior chamber depth. Barrett Universal II resulted the best formula for eyes disclosing an axial length >25 mm, whereas SRK/T turned out to be the best choice for the eyes characterized by an anterior chamber depth <2.8 mm. Our analysis disclosed an overall sensitivity of 0.8 and a specificity of 0.7 ( p < 0.01). Conclusions Axial length and anterior chamber depth influence the choice of Barrett Universal II and SRK/T formulas. Quantitative biometric cutoffs may be useful to discriminate the best formula to be adopted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document