Clinical feasibility of the ESCRS IOL power calculator.

IF 2.6 3区医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY

Journal of cataract and refractive surgery Pub Date : 2025-06-01 DOI:10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001637

Leon Pomberger, Lisa Tasch, Christoph Mayer-Xanthaki, Sophia A Reifeltshammer, Matthias Bolz, Nino Hirnschall

{"title":"Clinical feasibility of the ESCRS IOL power calculator.","authors":"Leon Pomberger, Lisa Tasch, Christoph Mayer-Xanthaki, Sophia A Reifeltshammer, Matthias Bolz, Nino Hirnschall","doi":"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001637","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: To assess the mean absolute error (MAE) of classic and modern intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas to evaluate the feasibility of the ESCRS IOL Calculator.Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, Johannes Kepler University and Kepler University Clinic, Linz, Austria; Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.Methods: 337 eyes of 337 patients who underwent implantation of a monofocal IOL (PCB00) were included in this study. The classic IOL calculation formulas output by the biometry device (Barrett Universal II [BUII], Haigis, SRK/T, and HofferQ) and modern formulas implemented in the ESCRS calculator (BUII, Cooke K6, EVO, Hill-RBF, Hoffer QST, Kane, and Pearl-DGS) were evaluated. The MAE, the number of eyes within ±0.5, ±1.0, ±1.5, ±2.0 diopters (D) of the target refraction, the agreement between ESCRS formulas on the proposed IOL power, and the time factor for the input in the ESCRS calculator were evaluated.Results: The best performing ESCRS calculator formulas were Kane, EVO, and BUII with a MAE (SD) of 0.37 (0.30) D, 0.37 (0.32) D, and 0.38 (0.32) D. A lower, but not significant difference in MAE for ESCRS formulas compared with biometry formulas was observed. A significant difference was observed between Hoffer QST and all other formulas (P < .01 for all). After excluding Hoffer QST, testing revealed a significant difference between ESCRS and biometry formulas (P = .004).Conclusions: The ESCRS calculator allows efficient and up-to-date IOL calculations in routine clinical practice. The predictive accuracy of the ESCRS calculator is superior compared with older biometric formulas.","PeriodicalId":15214,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","volume":"51 6","pages":"504-510"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001637","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the mean absolute error (MAE) of classic and modern intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas to evaluate the feasibility of the ESCRS IOL Calculator.

Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, Johannes Kepler University and Kepler University Clinic, Linz, Austria; Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.

Methods: 337 eyes of 337 patients who underwent implantation of a monofocal IOL (PCB00) were included in this study. The classic IOL calculation formulas output by the biometry device (Barrett Universal II [BUII], Haigis, SRK/T, and HofferQ) and modern formulas implemented in the ESCRS calculator (BUII, Cooke K6, EVO, Hill-RBF, Hoffer QST, Kane, and Pearl-DGS) were evaluated. The MAE, the number of eyes within ±0.5, ±1.0, ±1.5, ±2.0 diopters (D) of the target refraction, the agreement between ESCRS formulas on the proposed IOL power, and the time factor for the input in the ESCRS calculator were evaluated.

Results: The best performing ESCRS calculator formulas were Kane, EVO, and BUII with a MAE (SD) of 0.37 (0.30) D, 0.37 (0.32) D, and 0.38 (0.32) D. A lower, but not significant difference in MAE for ESCRS formulas compared with biometry formulas was observed. A significant difference was observed between Hoffer QST and all other formulas (P < .01 for all). After excluding Hoffer QST, testing revealed a significant difference between ESCRS and biometry formulas (P = .004).

Conclusions: The ESCRS calculator allows efficient and up-to-date IOL calculations in routine clinical practice. The predictive accuracy of the ESCRS calculator is superior compared with older biometric formulas.

查看原文本刊更多论文

ESCRS人工晶状体功率计算器的临床可行性。

目的：比较经典和现代人工晶状体度数计算公式的平均绝对误差（MAE），评价ESCRS人工晶状体度数计算器的可行性。单位：奥地利林茨约翰内斯·开普勒大学眼科及开普勒大学诊所；格拉茨医科大学眼科，奥地利格拉茨。方法：对337例单焦点人工晶体（PCB00）植入术患者的337只眼进行研究。对生物计量仪输出的经典IOL计算公式（Barrett Universal II [BUII]、Haigis、SRK/T和HofferQ）和ESCRS计算器实现的现代公式（BUII、Cooke K6、EVO、Hill-RBF、Hoffer QST、Kane和Pearl-DGS）进行了评价。评估MAE、目标屈光度在±0.5、±1.0、±1.5、±2.0屈光度(D)范围内的眼数、ESCRS公式对建议人工晶状体度数的一致性以及ESCRS计算器输入的时间因素。结果：ESCRS计算器公式的MAE （SD）为Kane、EVO和BUII， MAE （SD）分别为0.37 (0.30)D、0.37 (0.32)D和0.38 (0.32)D， ESCRS公式的MAE与生物计量公式的MAE较低，但差异不显著。Hoffer QST与所有其他公式之间存在显著差异（P < 0.01）。在排除Hoffer QST后，检验显示ESCRS与生物计量公式之间存在显著差异（P = 0.004）。结论：ESCRS计算器可以在常规临床实践中进行有效和最新的人工晶状体计算。ESCRS计算器的预测准确性优于旧的生物识别公式。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

$Journal of cataract and refractive surgery$

Journal of cataract and refractive surgery 医学-外科

CiteScore

5.60

自引率

14.30%

发文量

259

审稿时长

8.5 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery (JCRS), a preeminent peer-reviewed monthly ophthalmology publication, is the official journal of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) and the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS). JCRS publishes high quality articles on all aspects of anterior segment surgery. In addition to original clinical studies, the journal features a consultation section, practical techniques, important cases, and reviews as well as basic science articles.