ESCRS - FPT01.03 - Iol Calculation Using Eight Formulas In Silicon Oil Filled Eyes Undergoing Oil Removal And Lens Replacement After Retinal Detachment

Iol Calculation Using Eight Formulas In Silicon Oil Filled Eyes Undergoing Oil Removal And Lens Replacement After Retinal Detachment

Published 2022 - 40th Congress of the ESCRS

Reference: FPT01.03 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/dz08-ve53

Authors: Christoph Lwowski* 1 , Frank Koch 1 , Thomas Kohnen 1

1Department of Ophthalmology,Goethe University,Frankfurt,Germany

Purpose

To evaluate formulas for intraocular lens (IOL) calculation in silicon oil filled eyes 

Setting

Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany

Methods

In this retrospective consecutive case series we included silicon oil (SO) filled eyes that received SO removal combined with phacoemulsification and IOL implantation. Preoperative assessments included biometry (IOLMaster, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany). To evaluate the formulas, we compared the mean and median absolute prediction error (MAE, MedAE) of eight IOL calculation formulas and the amount of eyes within 0.5D, 1.0D, and 2.0D from target refraction.

Results

90 eyes matched our inclusion criteria. MedAE was lowest in the Barrett-Universal II formula (0.43D ± 0.75) followed by Kane (0.44D ± 0.75), Hill-RBF (0.47D ± 0.74), Holladay II (0.47D ± 0.77), SRK/T (0.51D ± 0.74), Holladay I (0.51D ± 0.76), Haigis and Hoffer Q (0.52D ± 0.74 each). Regarding eyes within ±0.5D Barrett Universal II (57.8%, 52 eyes) performed best, again followed by Kane (56.7%, 51 eyes) and Hill RBF (54.4%, 49 eyes).

Conclusions

Using modern formulas for IOL calculation in oil filled eyes improves predictability but still shows room for improvement. This points out the issue created by the difference in refractive index of SO and prediction of the effective lens position compared to healthy eyes.