Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

IOL Power Calculation in Short and Long Eyes

IOL Power Calculation in Short and Long Eyes Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/apjoo by BhDMf5ePHKbH4TTImqenVA5KvPVPZ0P5BEgU+IUTEfzO/GUWifn2IfwcEVVH9SSn on 06/02/2020 REVIEW ARTICLE Kenneth J. Hoffer, MD, FACS,*† and Giacomo Savini, MD‡ In that study, one of us (K.J.H.) showed a greater accuracy in pre- Abstract: An analysis of the studies published in the past 50 years diction with the Hoffer Q formula in eyes shorter than 22 mm (us- reveals that the Haigis, Hoffer Q, and Holladay 2 formulas are the best ing immersion ultrasound biometry). Later on, this difference was options for intraocular lens power prediction in short eyes (<22 mm). In confirmed statistically in a series of 984 eyes shorter than 22 mm long eyes (>26 mm), the Barrett Universal II, Haigis (with optimized (provided by James Gills, MD), which unfortunately was never constants), Olsen, and SRK/T formulas provide the most accurate out- published. The greater accuracy of the Hoffer Q formula in short comes for intraocular lens power prediction. eyes was conclusively and statistically proven by Aristidemou et al in 2011, using optical biometry in 8108 eyes. However, the Key Words: axial length, IOL power calculation, refractive error comparison was only with the other 2 third-generation formulas 4,5 (ie, the Holladay 1 and the SRK/T formulas). The difference (Asia-Pac http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology Wolters Kluwer Health

IOL Power Calculation in Short and Long Eyes

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wolters-kluwer-health/iol-power-calculation-in-short-and-long-eyes-EzctBgfVEf
Publisher
Wolters Kluwer Health
ISSN
2162-0989
eISSN
2475-5028
DOI
10.22608/APO.2017338
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/apjoo by BhDMf5ePHKbH4TTImqenVA5KvPVPZ0P5BEgU+IUTEfzO/GUWifn2IfwcEVVH9SSn on 06/02/2020 REVIEW ARTICLE Kenneth J. Hoffer, MD, FACS,*† and Giacomo Savini, MD‡ In that study, one of us (K.J.H.) showed a greater accuracy in pre- Abstract: An analysis of the studies published in the past 50 years diction with the Hoffer Q formula in eyes shorter than 22 mm (us- reveals that the Haigis, Hoffer Q, and Holladay 2 formulas are the best ing immersion ultrasound biometry). Later on, this difference was options for intraocular lens power prediction in short eyes (<22 mm). In confirmed statistically in a series of 984 eyes shorter than 22 mm long eyes (>26 mm), the Barrett Universal II, Haigis (with optimized (provided by James Gills, MD), which unfortunately was never constants), Olsen, and SRK/T formulas provide the most accurate out- published. The greater accuracy of the Hoffer Q formula in short comes for intraocular lens power prediction. eyes was conclusively and statistically proven by Aristidemou et al in 2011, using optical biometry in 8108 eyes. However, the Key Words: axial length, IOL power calculation, refractive error comparison was only with the other 2 third-generation formulas 4,5 (ie, the Holladay 1 and the SRK/T formulas). The difference (Asia-Pac

Journal

The Asia-Pacific Journal of OphthalmologyWolters Kluwer Health

Published: Jul 1, 2017

There are no references for this article.