Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of formulas and methods for high myopia patients requiring intraocular lens powers less than six diopters

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To determine the best method to minimize postoperative hyperopia and achieve mild myopia in patients requiring low-powered (<6.00 D) MN60MA intraocular lenses (IOLs).

Methods

This retrospective non-comparative case series consists of 32 eyes (20 patients). Postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) refractions were compared using four methods: standard formulas with varying target refractions (Haigis −1.00 D, Hoffer Q −1.75 D, Holladay 1 −1.50 D and SRK/T −1.00 and −1.25 D), axial length adjustment methods for standard formulas targeted for both plano and −0.50 D, Barrett Universal II formula and the Haigis formula using separate constants for plus and minus IOLs (Haigis +/−). SE (mean, standard deviation, median, range), median absolute error (MedAE), prediction errors, percentage SE less than 0.25 D and greater than −1.00 D, percentage SE within ±0.50 and ±1.00 D of the targeted refraction were calculated.

Results

All methods and formulas gave acceptable mean SE refractions ranging from −0.04 to −0.68 D. The Barrett Universal II, Haigis +/−, standard Haigis formula targeted for −1.00 D and the Holladay 1 formula targeted for −1.50 D met stricter criteria of final SE between 0.25 and −1.00 D in 94–100% of eyes and MedAE between 0.37 and 0.51 D. Other methods had more myopic or hyperopic outliers.

Conclusions

For these eyes with high myopia, the Barrett Universal II, Haigis +/−, standard Haigis targeted for −1.00 D and the standard Holladay 1 targeted for −1.50 D formulas produce the best results exceeding established benchmark criteria and minimizing hyperopic surprises.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zaldivar R, Shultz MC, Davidorf JM, Holladay JT (2000) Intraocular lens power calculations in patients with extreme myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 26:668–674

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. MacLaren RE, Sagoo MS, Restori R, Allan BDS (2005) Biometry accuracy using zero- and negative-powered intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 31:280–290

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kohnen S, Brauweiler P (1996) First results of cataract surgery and implantation of negative power intraocular lenses in highly myopic eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg 22:416–420

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Tsang CSL, Chong GSL, Yiu EPF, Ho CK (2003) Intraocular lens power calculation formulas in Chinese eyes with high axial myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 29:1358–1364

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Pomberg ML, Miller KM (2005) Preliminary efficacy and safety of zero diopter lens implantation in highly myopic eyes. Am J Ophthalmol 139:914–915

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wang L, Shirayama M, Ma XJ, Kohnen T, Koch DD (2011) Optimizing intraocular lens power calculations in eyes with axial lengths above 25.0 mm. J Cataract Refract Surg 37:2018–2027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wang JK, Hu CY, Chang SW (2008) Intraocular lens power calculation using the IOLMaster and various formulas in eyes with long axial length. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:262–267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Petermeier K, Gekeler F, Messias A, Spitzer MS, Haigis W, Szurman P (2009) Intraocular lens power calculation and optimized constants for highly myopic eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg 35:1575–1581

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Abulafia A, Barrett GD, Rotenberg M, Kleinmann G, Levy A, Reitblat O, Koch DD, Wang L, El Assia (2015) Intraocular lens power calculation for eyes with an axial length greater than 26.0 mm: comparison of formulas and methods. J Cataract Refract Surg 41:548–556

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Roessler GF, Dietlein TS, Plange N, Roepke A, Dinslage S, Walter P, Mazinani BA (2012) Accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation using partial coherence interferometry in patients with high myopia. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 32:228–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Terzi E, Wang L, Kohnen T (2009) Accuracy of modern intraocular lens power calculation formulas in refractive lens exchange for high myopia and high hyperopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 35:1181–1189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jimenez-Alfaro I, Miguelez S, Bueno J, Puy P (1998) Clear lens extraction and implantation of negative-power posterior chamber intraocular lenses to correct extreme myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 24:1310–1316

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Roessler GF, Talab YD, Dietlein TS, Dinslage S, Plange N, Walter P, Mazinani BA (2014) Partial coherence laser interferometry in highly myopic versus emmetropic eyes. J Ophthalmic Vis Res 9:169–173

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Haigis W (2009) Intraocular lens calculation in extreme myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 35:906–911

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Haigis W, Lege B, Miller N, Schneider B (2000) Comparison of immersion ultrasound biometry and partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens calculation according to Haigis. Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 238:765–773

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hoffer KJ (1993) The Hoffer Q formula: a comparison of theoretic and regression formulas. J Cataract Refract Surg 19:700–12; errata, 1994:20:677 and 2007;33:2-3

  17. Holladay JT, Prager TC, Chandler TY, Musgrove KH, Lewis JW, Ruiz RS (1988) A three-part system for refining intraocular lens power calculations. J Cataract Refract Surg 14:17–24

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Retzlaff JA, Sanders DR, Kraff MC (1990) Development of the SRK/T intraocular lens implant power calculation formula. J Cataract Refract Surg 16:333–40. erratum, 1990;16:528

  19. Barrett GD (1993) An improved universal theoretical formula for intraocular lens power prediction. J Cataract Refract Surg 19:713–720

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Feiz V, Mannis MJ, Garcia-Ferrer F, Kandavel G, Darlington JK, Kim E, Caspar J, Wang J-L, Wang W (2001) Intraocular lens power calculation after laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia and hyperopia. Cornea 20:792–797

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hoffer KJ, Aramberri J, Haigis W, Olsen T, Savini G, Shammas HJ, Bentow S (2015) Protocols for studies of intraocular lens formula accuracy. Am J Ophthalmol 160:403–405

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Behndig A, Montan P, Stenevi U, Kugelberg M, Zetterstrom C, Lundstrom M (2012) Aiming for emmetropia after cataract surgery: Swedish National Cataract Register study. J Cataract Refract Surg 38:1181–1186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Simon SS, Chee YE, Haddadin RI, Veldman PB, Borboli-Gerogiannis S, Brauner SC, Chang KK, Chen SH, Gardiner MF, Greenstein SH, Kloek CE, Chen TC (2014) Achieving target refraction after cataract surgery. Ophthalmology 121:440–444

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yokoi T, Moriyama M, Hayashi K, Shimada N, Ohno-Matsui K (2013) Evaluation of refractive error after cataract surgery in highly myopic eyes. Int Ophthalmol 33:343–348

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Ophthalmology, Virginia Mason Medical Center, C4-S, 1100 Ninth Avenue, Seattle, WA, 98111, USA

    Harry S. Geggel

Authors
  1. Harry S. Geggel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harry S. Geggel.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest. The author certifies that he has no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Retrospective study: For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Geggel, H.S. Comparison of formulas and methods for high myopia patients requiring intraocular lens powers less than six diopters. Int Ophthalmol 38, 1497–1504 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-017-0611-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-017-0611-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation