Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas in Cataract Eyes after Vitrectomy with Silicone Oil Tamponade: A Network Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.1 4区医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY

Ophthalmic Research Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2026-03-05 DOI:10.1159/000551331

Peng Zhao, Meng Li, Zhao-Xing Guo, Zhi-Yong Tian, Jing-Shang Zhang, Ying-Yan Mao, Zheng Xin, Zhong-Yan Li, Xiu-Hua Wan

{"title":"Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas in Cataract Eyes after Vitrectomy with Silicone Oil Tamponade: A Network Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Peng Zhao, Meng Li, Zhao-Xing Guo, Zhi-Yong Tian, Jing-Shang Zhang, Ying-Yan Mao, Zheng Xin, Zhong-Yan Li, Xiu-Hua Wan","doi":"10.1159/000551331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The aim of the study was to systematically compare the accuracy of artificial intelligence and traditional intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas in cataract eyes after vitrectomy with silicone oil tamponade.Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched to select relevant studies published up to October 29, 2025. A total of 12 formulas (SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Hoffer QST, Haigis, Barrett Universal II, Holladay I, Holladay II, RBF, LSF, EVO, Kane, and Pearl-DGS) were included for final comparison. The primary outcomes were the percentage of eyes with prediction errors (PE) within ± 0.50 D and ± 1.00 D.Results: This meta-analysis included 7 studies comprising 1,060 eyes. Overall, compared to traditional formulas, newer formulas demonstrated relatively higher accuracy. The results indicated that among all the formulas being compared, the optimal formula was Kane. For the percentage of eyes with PE within ± 0.50 D, Kane had the highest precision. For the IOL power percentage within ± 1.00 D, EVO performed the best, with Kane also ranking highly. Furthermore, RBF also performed very well.Conclusion: Kane and EVO appear to be better choices for silicone oil-filled eyes after vitrectomy.","PeriodicalId":19662,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic Research","volume":" ","pages":"85-97"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13155740/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000551331","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of the study was to systematically compare the accuracy of artificial intelligence and traditional intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas in cataract eyes after vitrectomy with silicone oil tamponade.

Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched to select relevant studies published up to October 29, 2025. A total of 12 formulas (SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Hoffer QST, Haigis, Barrett Universal II, Holladay I, Holladay II, RBF, LSF, EVO, Kane, and Pearl-DGS) were included for final comparison. The primary outcomes were the percentage of eyes with prediction errors (PE) within ± 0.50 D and ± 1.00 D.

Results: This meta-analysis included 7 studies comprising 1,060 eyes. Overall, compared to traditional formulas, newer formulas demonstrated relatively higher accuracy. The results indicated that among all the formulas being compared, the optimal formula was Kane. For the percentage of eyes with PE within ± 0.50 D, Kane had the highest precision. For the IOL power percentage within ± 1.00 D, EVO performed the best, with Kane also ranking highly. Furthermore, RBF also performed very well.

Conclusion: Kane and EVO appear to be better choices for silicone oil-filled eyes after vitrectomy.

查看原文本刊更多论文

硅油填塞玻璃体切除术后白内障眼人工晶状体度数计算公式的准确性：网络荟萃分析。

目的：系统比较人工智能与传统人工晶状体（IOL）计算公式在硅油填塞白内障眼玻璃体切除术后的准确性。方法：检索PubMed、Cochrane、Embase和Web of Science数据库，选取截至2025年10月29日发表的相关研究。12个公式（SRK/T、Hoffer Q、Hoffer QST、Haigis、Barrett Universal II、Holladay I、Holladay II、RBF、LSF、EVO、Kane和Pearl-DGS）用于最终比较。主要结局为预测误差（PE）在±0.50D和±1.00D范围内的眼睛百分比。结果：本荟萃分析包括7项研究，共1060只眼睛。总的来说，与传统公式相比，新公式显示出相对较高的准确性。结果表明，在所有的比较公式中，凯恩公式是最优的。对于PE在±0.50 D范围内的眼睛百分比，Kane具有最高的精度。对于±1.00 D以内的IOL度数百分比，EVO表现最好，Kane排名也较高，RBF表现也很好。结论：Kane和EVO是玻璃体切除术后硅油填充眼的较好选择。

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

Ophthalmic Research 医学-眼科学

CiteScore

3.80

自引率

4.80%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： ''Ophthalmic Research'' features original papers and reviews reporting on translational and clinical studies. Authors from throughout the world cover research topics on every field in connection with physical, physiologic, pharmacological, biochemical and molecular biological aspects of ophthalmology. This journal also aims to provide a record of international clinical research for both researchers and clinicians in ophthalmology. Finally, the transfer of information from fundamental research to clinical research and clinical practice is particularly welcome.