ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2024
Accuracy of 20 Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas in Medium-Long Eyes.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review of intraocular lens power calculation formulas in eyes after corneal refractive surgery.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Review
- Comparison of Prediction Accuracy of Six Toric IOL Power Calculation Formulas, Including Four Available on the ESCRS Online Calculator.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Development and Clinical Accuracy of the New Paraxial Ray-Tracing IOL Power Formula (VRT) Based on the Thin Lens Assumption.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Improved IOL Power Calculation With Femtosecond Laser Enhanced Refractive Outcome Prediction.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Innovations in Intraocular Lens Power Calculation-A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Evidence Based Analysis Enhances Surgical Outcomes of Novice Resident Surgeons.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparing IOL refraction prediction accuracy and A-constant optimization for cataract surgery patients across South Indian and Midwestern United States populations.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Accuracy of 12 IOL power calculation formulas in highly myopic eyes.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Cost-benefit analysis of a trifocal intraocular lens versus a monofocal intraocular lens in South Korea.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- SS-OCT-based ocular biometric characteristics of patients with nuclear cataract.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Article
- Assessing the interchangeability of keratometry measurements from four biometric devices in intraocular lens power calculations: insights into the predictive accuracy of five modern IOL formulas.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Biometry and keratometry measurements after intracorneal ring segment implantation in keratoconus patients: a pilot comparison between Pentacam AXL and IOL Master 700.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Studying the added effect of sum-of-segments biometry to modern intraocular lens power calculation formulas for short eyes.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Advanced Artificial-Intelligence-Based Jiang Formula for Intraocular Lens Power in Congenital Ectopia Lentis.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Prediction of Seven Artificial Intelligence-Based Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas in Medium-Long Caucasian Eyes.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Clinical features, management, and outcomes of posterior capsule rupture during phacoemulsification surgery.Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia · 2025Observational
- Lens Factor Choice in IOL Power Calculation after Laser Refractive Surgery: The Right Constant for Advanced Lens Measurement Approach (ALMA).Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Accuracy of intraocular lens calculation formulas based on swept-source OCT biometer in cataract patients with phakic intraocular lens.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this work is to compare 20 intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas in medium-long eyes (24.50-25.99 mm) in terms of root mean square absolute error (RMSAE), median absolute error (MedAE), and percentage of eyes with prediction error (PE) within ± 0.50 D.
methodsThe data of patients who underwent uneventful phacoemulsification between January 2017 and September 2023 were reviewed. Pre-surgery IOL power was calculated using Holladay1, SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 2, and Haigis. Three months after phacoemulsification, refraction was measured. Post-surgery IOL power calculations were performed utilizing the following formulas: Barrett Universal II, Kane, K6, Olsen (OLCR), Olsen (standalone), PEARL-DGS, Ladas Super Formula AI (LSF AI), T2, EVO, VRF, Hoffer QST, Castrop, VRF-G, Karmona, and Naeser 2. RMSAE, MedAE, and percentage of eyes with PE within ± 0.25 D, ± 0.50 D, ± 0.75 D and ± 1.00 were calculated.
resultsOne hundred twenty-four eyes with axial length ranges between 24.52 and 25.97 mm were studied. The SRK/T formula yielded the lowest RMSAE (0.206) just before Holladay 1 (0.260) and T2 (0.261). In terms of MedAE, the best outcome was obtained by SRK/T (0.12) followed by Barrett Universal II (0.15) and LSF AI (0.15). The highest percentage of eyes with prediction error within ± 0.50 D was achieved by SRK/T, T2, and Holladay 1 (97.58, 93.55, and 93.55%, respectively).
conclusionsThird-generation formulas (SRK/T, Holladay 1) provided highly accurate outcomes in medium-long eyes and still can be wildly used to calculate IOL power.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.