Intraoperative aberrometry vs standard preoperative biometry in non-toric and toric IOL calculations

Session Details

Session Title: Pseudophakic IOL Power Calculation: Photic Phenomena after IOL Implantation

Session Date/Time: Sunday 08/10/2017 | 16:30-18:00

Paper Time: 16:36

Venue: Room 3.4

First Author: : V.Webers THE NETHERLANDS

Co Author(s): :    N. Bauer   R. Nuijts                 

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To compare: 1. postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) predictions by intraoperative aberrometry (ORA, Alcon) and optical biometry (IOLMaster, Zeiss) in a non-toric IOL group; 2. SE prediction by ORA and a toric calculator (Barrett) in a toric IOL group.

Setting:

University Eye Clinic Maastricht, the Netherlands

Methods:

A total of sixty-four and 33 eyes were included in respectively the non-toric IOL group and toric IOL group. Optical biometry was used to calculate IOL power in the non-toric IOL group, whereas the Barrett toric calculator was used to determine the toric IOL power. SE of both the preoperative calculations and intraoperative ORA measurements were compared to postoperative achieved SE. The prediction error was defined as the percentage eyes with a 0.25D, 0.50D, and 1.00D difference between predicted and achieved SE.

Results:

Non-toric group: the prediction error was ≤0.25D,≤0.50D, and ≤1.00D in respectively 47%, 69%, and 92% of cases performing IOL calculation with the IOLMaster compared to 63%, 88%, and 100% using the ORA. The mean absolute prediction error was 0.38±0.24D and 0.26±0.39D respectively for the IOLMaster or ORA (p<.05). Toric group: the prediction error was ≤0.25D,≤0.50D, and ≤1.00D in respectively 39%,76%, and 94% of cases performing IOL calculation with the Barrett Calculator compared to 76%, 88%, and 100% when performed using the ORA. The mean absolute prediction error was 0.35±0.19D and 0.25±0.19D respectively for the Barrett Calculator or ORA (p>.05).

Conclusions:

The mean prediction error in both toric and non- toric groups was low for all three calculations. However, the percentage of prediction errors of ≤0.25D and ≤0.50D was higher using the ORA compared to the IOLMaster and Barrett Calculator, suggesting the ORA to be more accurate in predicting postoperative SE.

Financial Disclosure:

receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a competing company