Comparison of the Barrett Universal II, Kane and VRF-G formulas with existing intraocular lens calculation formulas in eyes with short axial lengths.

Abstract

To compare the accuracy of recently developed modern intraocular lens (IOL) power formulas (Barrett Universal II, Kane and VRF-G) with existing IOL power formulas in eyes with an axial length (AL) ≤ 22 mm. This analysis comprised 172 eyes of 172 patients operated on by one surgeon (LT) with one IQ SN60WF (Alcon Labs, Fort Worth, TX, USA) hydrophobic lens. Ten IOL formulas were evaluated: Barrett Universal II (BUII), Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Kane, SRK/T, T2, VRF and VRF-G. The median absolute error (MedAE), mean absolute error (MAE), standard deviation (SD) and all descriptive statistics were evaluated. Percentages of eyes with a prediction error within ±0.25 D, ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D and ±1.00 D were calculated using standard optimised constants for the entire range of axial lengths. The VRF-G, Haigis and Kane produced the smallest MedAE among all formulas (0.242 D, 0.247 D and 0.263 D, respectively) and had the highest percentage of eyes with a PE within ±0.50 D (75.67%, 73.84% and 75.16%, respectively). The Barrett was less accurate (0.298 D and 68.02%, respectively). Statistically significant differences were found predominantly between the VRF-G (P < 0.05), Kane (P < 0.05) and Haigis (P < 0.05) and all other formulas. The percentage of eyes with a PE within ±0.50 D ranged from 66.28% to 75.67%. In eyes with AL ≤ 22.0 mm, the VRF-G, Haigis and Kane were the most accurate predictors of postoperative refraction, and the Barrett formula was less predictable.