ReviewSaudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society
Intraocular lens power calculation in challenging cases.
Review in Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in cataract management: current status and future perspectives.International ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Challenges in Biometry and Intraocular Lens Power Calculations in Keratoconus: A Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Studying the effect of keratoconus severity on the accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation using newer keratoconus-specific formulas.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
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
In this article, we reviewed recently published papers of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in special eyes. In short eyes, accurate estimation of effective lens position is critical, and the ZEISS artificial intelligence IOL calculator produces the best outcomes. In long eyes, accuracy has been improved with axial length (AL) adjusted formulas such as the Wang-Koch AL adjustment and newer IOL formulas. In keratoconic eyes, hyperopic refractive outcomes increase with steeper keratometric values, and accuracy is poor in eyes with keratometric values ≥50.0 D. Two keratoconus-specific formulas (Barrett True K for keratoconus and Kane keratoconus) have been introduced. In eyes undergoing combined Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty and cataract surgery, steeper corneas and corneas with a lower anterior/posterior ratio may have higher degrees of corneal flattening, and more myopia ranging from -0.75 to -1.0 D should be targeted. The postrefractive IOL power calculator from the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery website has been a useful tool for postrefractive IOL power calculation. Recently, newer IOL formulas incorporating both anterior and posterior corneal measurements were introduced for eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery: Barrett True-K TK, Pearl-DGS, EVO 2.0, and Hoffer QST. It is recommended to obtain IOL calculations using as many formulas as possible and select the IOL power based on the consensus of multiple methods, with more weight given to the newer IOL power calculation formulas.
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.