Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate formulas for intraocular lens (IOL) calculation in children undergoing lens extraction and IOL implantation.
METHODS: Retrospective, consecutive case series at the Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany. We included eyes that received lens extraction and IOL implantation (SN60AT, Alcon, Fort Worth, TX) due to congenital or juvenile cataract. Preoperative assessments included biometry (IOLMaster 500/700, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany). To evaluate the measurements, we compared the mean prediction error (MPE), mean and median absolute prediction error (MAE, MedAE) of six different formulas, and number of eyes within ± 0.5, ± 1.0, ± 2.0D of target refraction. Postoperative spherical equivalent was measured by retinoscopy 4-12 weeks after surgery.
RESULTS: 66 eyes matched our inclusion criteria with a mean age of 6.3 years ± 3.2. MedAE was lowest in SRK/T (0.55D ± 1.08) followed by Holladay I (0.75D ± 1.00), EVO 2.0 (0.80D ± 0.89), Barrett Universal II (BUII, 0.86D ± 1.00), Hoffer Q (0.97 D ± 0.94), and Haigis (1.10D ± 0.95). Regarding eyes within ± 0.5D SRK/T (45.5.%, 30 eyes) performed best, followed by Holladay I (36.4%, 24 eyes), EVO 2.0 and BUII (each 34.8%, 23 eyes). There was a myopic shift seen in all formulas (MPE: -0.21 to -0.90D).
CONCLUSIONS: Using modern formulas, or even AI formulas, for IOL calculation in children\'s eyes does barely improve predictability of the postoperative refraction. A myopic shift can be found for all formulas. However, specific formulas like SRK/T seem to better anticipate this.
METHODS: Retrospective, consecutive case series at the Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany. We included eyes that received lens extraction and IOL implantation (SN60AT, Alcon, Fort Worth, TX) due to congenital or juvenile cataract. Preoperative assessments included biometry (IOLMaster 500/700, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany). To evaluate the measurements, we compared the mean prediction error (MPE), mean and median absolute prediction error (MAE, MedAE) of six different formulas, and number of eyes within ± 0.5, ± 1.0, ± 2.0D of target refraction. Postoperative spherical equivalent was measured by retinoscopy 4-12 weeks after surgery.
RESULTS: 66 eyes matched our inclusion criteria with a mean age of 6.3 years ± 3.2. MedAE was lowest in SRK/T (0.55D ± 1.08) followed by Holladay I (0.75D ± 1.00), EVO 2.0 (0.80D ± 0.89), Barrett Universal II (BUII, 0.86D ± 1.00), Hoffer Q (0.97 D ± 0.94), and Haigis (1.10D ± 0.95). Regarding eyes within ± 0.5D SRK/T (45.5.%, 30 eyes) performed best, followed by Holladay I (36.4%, 24 eyes), EVO 2.0 and BUII (each 34.8%, 23 eyes). There was a myopic shift seen in all formulas (MPE: -0.21 to -0.90D).
CONCLUSIONS: Using modern formulas, or even AI formulas, for IOL calculation in children\'s eyes does barely improve predictability of the postoperative refraction. A myopic shift can be found for all formulas. However, specific formulas like SRK/T seem to better anticipate this.
摘要：
目的：评估人工晶状体（IOL）计算的公式在儿童晶状体摘除和人工晶状体植入术中的应用。
方法：回顾性，眼科连续病例系列，法兰克福歌德大学,德国。我们包括接受晶状体摘除和人工晶状体植入的眼睛(SN60AT，爱尔康,沃思堡,TX）由于先天性或幼年性白内障。术前评估包括生物统计学（IOLMaster500/700，CarlZeissMeditec，德国)。为了评估测量结果，我们比较了平均预测误差(MPE)，平均和中值绝对预测误差(MAE，MedAE)的六种不同配方，目标屈光度±0.5、±1.0、±2.0D范围内的眼数。手术后4-12周通过视网膜镜检查测量术后球形当量。
结果：66只眼符合我们的纳入标准，平均年龄为6.3岁±3.2。MedAE在SRK/T中最低（0.55D±1.08），其次是HolladayI（0.75D±1.00），EVO2.0（0.80D±0.89），巴雷特环球II(BUII，0.86D±1.00),霍夫Q（0.97D±0.94），和海吉斯（1.10D±0.95）。关于±0.5DSRK/T（45.5。%,30只眼睛)表现最好，其次是HolladayI(36.4%，24只眼睛），EVO2.0和BUII(各34.8%，23只眼睛）。在所有公式(MPE:-0.21至-0.90D)中都观察到近视偏移。
结论：使用现代公式，甚至是AI公式，儿童眼的IOL计算几乎不能提高术后屈光的可预测性。可以发现所有公式的近视偏移。然而,像SRK/T这样的特定公式似乎更好地预测了这一点。
方法：回顾性，眼科连续病例系列，法兰克福歌德大学,德国。我们包括接受晶状体摘除和人工晶状体植入的眼睛(SN60AT，爱尔康,沃思堡,TX）由于先天性或幼年性白内障。术前评估包括生物统计学（IOLMaster500/700，CarlZeissMeditec，德国)。为了评估测量结果，我们比较了平均预测误差(MPE)，平均和中值绝对预测误差(MAE，MedAE)的六种不同配方，目标屈光度±0.5、±1.0、±2.0D范围内的眼数。手术后4-12周通过视网膜镜检查测量术后球形当量。
结果：66只眼符合我们的纳入标准，平均年龄为6.3岁±3.2。MedAE在SRK/T中最低（0.55D±1.08），其次是HolladayI（0.75D±1.00），EVO2.0（0.80D±0.89），巴雷特环球II(BUII，0.86D±1.00),霍夫Q（0.97D±0.94），和海吉斯（1.10D±0.95）。关于±0.5DSRK/T（45.5。%,30只眼睛)表现最好，其次是HolladayI(36.4%，24只眼睛），EVO2.0和BUII(各34.8%，23只眼睛）。在所有公式(MPE:-0.21至-0.90D)中都观察到近视偏移。
结论：使用现代公式，甚至是AI公式，儿童眼的IOL计算几乎不能提高术后屈光的可预测性。可以发现所有公式的近视偏移。然而,像SRK/T这样的特定公式似乎更好地预测了这一点。
