Accuracy of Contemporary Intraocular Lens Calculation Formulas Based on Swept-Source OCT Biometry in Eyes with Capsular Tension Ring.

Q3 Medicine

Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology Pub Date : 2026-06-24 DOI:10.4274/tjo.galenos.2026.33338

Ali Devebacak, Müge Yılmaz, Gül Arıkan

{"title":"Accuracy of Contemporary Intraocular Lens Calculation Formulas Based on Swept-Source OCT Biometry in Eyes with Capsular Tension Ring.","authors":"Ali Devebacak, Müge Yılmaz, Gül Arıkan","doi":"10.4274/tjo.galenos.2026.33338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To compare the refractive prediction accuracy of contemporary intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas based on swept-source optical coherence tomography (OCT) biometry in cataract surgery with capsular tension ring (CTR) implantation, and to assess for systematic postoperative refractive tendencies.Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 98 eyes of 92 patients who underwent phacoemulsification with in-the-bag IOL and CTR implantation. Preoperative biometry utilized swept-source OCT (ARGOS, Alcon). Refractive prediction accuracy was evaluated for the Barrett Universal II, Haigis, SRK/T, and Holladay II formulas. Main outcomes included mean prediction error, mean absolute error (MAE), median absolute error (MedAE), and percentages of eyes within ±0.25, ±0.50, and ±1.00 diopter (D).Results: The mean age was 73.0±8.1 years, and the mean axial length was 23.03±1.04 mm. Barrett Universal II yielded the lowest MAE and MedAE (0.36±0.34 D and 0.24 D, respectively), followed by Holladay II (0.40±0.32 D and 0.30 D). Higher MAE was observed with SRK/T (0.45±0.37 D) and Haigis (0.54±0.45 D). MAE differed significantly among the formulas (p<0.001), with pairwise comparisons showing that Barrett Universal II and Holladay II performed similarly (p>0.05) and better than both Haigis and SRK/T (all p≤0.003). The highest percentage of eyes within ±0.25 D was observed with Barrett Universal II (52.04%), whereas Holladay II showed the highest percentage within ±0.50 D (69.39%), and the two formulas tied within the ±1.00 D range (both 92.86%). Prediction errors were positive for all formulas, indicating a mild hyperopic shift.Conclusion: In eyes undergoing cataract surgery with CTR implantation, Barrett Universal II and Holladay II showed more favorable refractive prediction accuracy than Haigis and SRK/T. A mild hyperopic shift was observed across all formulas. This finding may be clinically relevant when selecting the target refraction or IOL power in these eyes.","PeriodicalId":23373,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":"56 3","pages":"166-171"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13294638/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.galenos.2026.33338","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the refractive prediction accuracy of contemporary intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas based on swept-source optical coherence tomography (OCT) biometry in cataract surgery with capsular tension ring (CTR) implantation, and to assess for systematic postoperative refractive tendencies.

Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 98 eyes of 92 patients who underwent phacoemulsification with in-the-bag IOL and CTR implantation. Preoperative biometry utilized swept-source OCT (ARGOS, Alcon). Refractive prediction accuracy was evaluated for the Barrett Universal II, Haigis, SRK/T, and Holladay II formulas. Main outcomes included mean prediction error, mean absolute error (MAE), median absolute error (MedAE), and percentages of eyes within ±0.25, ±0.50, and ±1.00 diopter (D).

Results: The mean age was 73.0±8.1 years, and the mean axial length was 23.03±1.04 mm. Barrett Universal II yielded the lowest MAE and MedAE (0.36±0.34 D and 0.24 D, respectively), followed by Holladay II (0.40±0.32 D and 0.30 D). Higher MAE was observed with SRK/T (0.45±0.37 D) and Haigis (0.54±0.45 D). MAE differed significantly among the formulas (p<0.001), with pairwise comparisons showing that Barrett Universal II and Holladay II performed similarly (p>0.05) and better than both Haigis and SRK/T (all p≤0.003). The highest percentage of eyes within ±0.25 D was observed with Barrett Universal II (52.04%), whereas Holladay II showed the highest percentage within ±0.50 D (69.39%), and the two formulas tied within the ±1.00 D range (both 92.86%). Prediction errors were positive for all formulas, indicating a mild hyperopic shift.

Conclusion: In eyes undergoing cataract surgery with CTR implantation, Barrett Universal II and Holladay II showed more favorable refractive prediction accuracy than Haigis and SRK/T. A mild hyperopic shift was observed across all formulas. This finding may be clinically relevant when selecting the target refraction or IOL power in these eyes.

查看原文本刊更多论文

基于扫描源OCT生物测量的囊膜张力环眼人工晶状体计算公式的准确性。

目的：比较基于扫源光学相干断层扫描（OCT）生物测量技术的当代人工晶状体（IOL）计算公式在白内障晶状体植入术中屈光预测的准确性，并对术后系统的屈光倾向进行评估。材料与方法：回顾性研究92例98眼超声乳化术合并囊内人工晶状体及CTR植入术患者。术前生物测量采用扫描源OCT （ARGOS, Alcon）。评估Barrett Universal II、Haigis、SRK/T和Holladay II公式的折光预测精度。主要结果包括平均预测误差、平均绝对误差（MAE）、中位绝对误差（MedAE）和眼睛在±0.25、±0.50和±1.00屈光度范围内的百分比(D)。结果：平均年龄73.0±8.1岁，平均轴长23.03±1.04 mm。Barrett Universal II的MAE和MedAE最低（分别为0.36±0.34 D和0.24 D）， Holladay II次之（0.40±0.32 D和0.30 D）。SRK/T（0.45±0.37 D）和Haigis（0.54±0.45 D）组MAE较高。MAE在不同配方间差异显著（p0.05），且优于Haigis和SRK/T（均p≤0.003）。Barrett Universal II在±0.25 D范围内的眼睛比例最高（52.04%），Holladay II在±0.50 D范围内的眼睛比例最高（69.39%），两者并列在±1.00 D范围内（均为92.86%）。所有公式的预测误差均为正，表明轻度远视转移。结论：Barrett Universal II和Holladay II对CTR植入术白内障患者的屈光预测准确率优于Haigis和SRK/T。在所有配方中均观察到轻度远视移位。这一发现可能对选择这些眼的目标屈光度或人工晶体度数具有临床意义。

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

Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology Medicine-Ophthalmology

CiteScore

2.20

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology (TJO) is the only scientific periodical publication of the Turkish Ophthalmological Association and has been published since January 1929. In its early years, the journal was published in Turkish and French. Although there were temporary interruptions in the publication of the journal due to various challenges, the Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology has been published continually from 1971 to the present. The target audience includes specialists and physicians in training in ophthalmology in all relevant disciplines.