Clinical validation of an algorithm to correct the error in the keratometric estimation of corneal power for normal eyes

To validate clinically an algorithm for correcting the error in the keratometric estimation of corneal power by using a variable keratometric index of refraction (nk) in a normal healthy population.

Minimizing the IOL Power Error Induced by Keratometric Power

Purpose. To evaluate theoretically in normal eyes the influence on IOL power (PIOL) calculation of the use of a keratometric index (nk) and to analyze and validate preliminarily the use of an adjusted keratometric index (nkadj) in the IOL power calculation (PIOLadj). Methods. A model of variable keratometric index (nkadj) for corneal power calculation (Pc) was used for IOL power calculation (named PIOLadj). Theoretical differences ($PIOL) between the new proposed formula (PIOLadj) and which is obtained through Gaussian optics (PIOL Gauss) were determined using Gullstrand and Le Grand eye models. The proposed new formula for IOL power calculation (PIOLadj) was prevalidated clinically in 81 eyes of 81 candidates for corneal refractive surgery and compared with Haigis, HofferQ, Holladay, and SRK/T formulas. Results. A theoretical PIOL underestimation greater than 0.5 diopters was present in most of the cases when nk = 1.3375 was used. If nkadj was used for Pc calculation, a maximal calculated error in $PIOL of T0.5 diopters at corneal vertex in most cases was observed independently from the eye model, r1c, and the desired postoperative refraction. The use of nkadj in IOL power calculation (PIOLadj) could be valid with effective lens position optimization nondependent of the corneal power. Conclusions. The use of a single value of nk for Pc calculation can lead to significant errors in PIOL calculation that may explain some IOL power overestimations with conventional formulas. These inaccuracies can be minimized by using the new PIOLadj based on the algorithm of nkadj.

Algorithm for Correcting the Keratometric Error in the Estimation of the Corneal Power in Eyes With Previous Myopic Laser Refractive Surgery

Purpose: To calculate theoretically the errors in the estimation of corneal power when using the keratometric index (nk) in eyes that underwent laser refractive surgery for the correction of myopia and to define and validate clinically an algorithm for minimizing such errors. Methods: Differences between corneal power estimation by using the classical nk and by using the Gaussian equation in eyes that underwent laser myopic refractive surgery were simulated and evaluated theoretically. Additionally, an adjusted keratometric index (nkadj) model dependent on r1c was developed for minimizing these differences. The model was validated clinically by retrospectively using the data from 32 myopic eyes [range, −1.00 to −6.00 diopters (D)] that had undergone laser in situ keratomileusis using a solid-state laser platform. The agreement between Gaussian (PGaussc) and adjusted keratometric (Pkadj) corneal powers in such eyes was evaluated. Results: It was found that overestimations of corneal power up to 3.5 D were possible for nk = 1.3375 according to our simulations. The nk value to avoid the keratometric error ranged between 1.2984 and 1.3297. The following nkadj models were obtained: nkadj= −0.0064286r1c + 1.37688 (Gullstrand eye model) and nkadj = −0.0063804r1c + 1.37806 (Le Grand). The mean difference between Pkadj and PGaussc was 0.00 D, with limits of agreement of −0.45 and +0.46 D. This difference correlated significantly with the posterior corneal radius (r = −0.94, P < 0.01). Conclusions: The use of a single nk for estimating the corneal power in eyes that underwent a laser myopic refractive surgery can lead to significant errors. These errors can be minimized by using a variable nk dependent on r1c.

New Approach for Correction of Error Associated With Keratometric Estimation of Corneal Power in Keratoconus

The aim of this study was to obtain the exact value of the keratometric index (nkexact) and to clinically validate a variable keratometric index (nkadj) that minimizes this error. Methods: The nkexact value was determined by obtaining differences (DPc) between keratometric corneal power (Pk) and Gaussian corneal power (PGauss c ) equal to 0. The nkexact was defined as the value associated with an equivalent difference in the magnitude of DPc for extreme values of posterior corneal radius (r2c) for each anterior corneal radius value (r1c). This nkadj was considered for the calculation of the adjusted corneal power (Pkadj). Values of r1c ∈ (4.2, 8.5) mm and r2c ∈ (3.1, 8.2) mm were considered. Differences of True Net Power with PGauss c , Pkadj, and Pk(1.3375) were calculated in a clinical sample of 44 eyes with keratoconus. Results: nkexact ranged from 1.3153 to 1.3396 and nkadj from 1.3190 to 1.3339 depending on the eye model analyzed. All the nkadj values adjusted perfectly to 8 linear algorithms. Differences between Pkadj and PGauss c did not exceed 60.7 D (Diopter). Clinically, nk = 1.3375 was not valid in any case. Pkadj and True Net Power and Pk(1.3375) and Pkadj were statistically different (P , 0.01), whereas no differences were found between PGauss c and Pkadj (P . 0.01). Conclusions: The use of a single value of nk for the calculation of the total corneal power in keratoconus has been shown to be imprecise, leading to inaccuracies in the detection and classification of this corneal condition. Furthermore, our study shows the relevance of corneal thickness in corneal power calculations in keratoconus.

Estimation of the Central Corneal Power in Keratoconus: Theoretical and Clinical Assessment of the Error of the Keratometric Approach

Purpose: The aim of this study was to analyze theoretically the errors in the central corneal power calculation in eyes with keratoconus when a keratometric index (nk) is used and to clinically confirm the errors induced by this approach. Methods: Differences (DPc) between central corneal power estimation with the classical nk (Pk) and with the Gaussian equation (PGauss c ) in eyes with keratoconus were simulated and evaluated theoretically, considering the potential range of variation of the central radius of curvature of the anterior (r1c) and posterior (r2c) corneal surfaces. Further, these differences were also studied in a clinical sample including 44 keratoconic eyes (27 patients, age range: 14–73 years). The clinical agreement between Pk and PGauss c (true net power) obtained with a Scheimpflug photography–based topographer was evaluated in such eyes. Results: For nk = 1.3375, an overestimation was observed in most cases in the theoretical simulations, with DPc ranging from an underestimation of 20.1 diopters (D) (r1c = 7.9 mm and r2c = 8.2 mm) to an overestimation of 4.3 D (r1c = 4.7 mm and r2c = 3.1 mm). Clinically, Pk always overestimated the PGauss c given by the topography system in a range between 0.5 and 2.5 D (P , 0.01). The mean clinical DPc was 1.48 D, with limits of agreement of 0.71 and 2.25 D. A very strong statistically significant correlation was found between DPc and r2c (r = 20.93, P , 0.01). Conclusions: The use of a single value for nk for the calculation of corneal power is imprecise in keratoconus and can lead to significant clinical errors.

Error induced by the estimation of the corneal power and the effective lens position with a rotationally asymmetric refractive multifocal intraocular lens

AIM: To evaluate the prediction error in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation for a rotationally asymmetric refractive multifocal IOL and the impact on this error of the optimization of the keratometric estimation of the corneal power and the prediction of the effective lens position (ELP). METHODS: Retrospective study including a total of 25 eyes of 13 patients (age, 50 to 83y) with previous cataract surgery with implantation of the Lentis Mplus LS-312 IOL (Oculentis GmbH, Germany). In all cases, an adjusted IOL power (PIOLadj) was calculated based on Gaussian optics using a variable keratometric index value (nkadj) for the estimation of the corneal power (Pkadj) and on a new value for ELP (ELPadj) obtained by multiple regression analysis. This PIOLadj was compared with the IOL power implanted (PIOLReal) and the value proposed by three conventional formulas (Haigis, Hoffer Q and Holladay). RESULTS: PIOLReal was not significantly different than PIOLadj and Holladay IOL power (P>0.05). In the Bland and Altman analysis, PIOLadj showed lower mean difference (-0.07 D) and limits of agreement (of 1.47 and -1.61 D) when compared to PIOLReal than the IOL power value obtained with the Holladay formula. Furthermore, ELPadj was significantly lower than ELP calculated with other conventional formulas (P<0.01) and was found to be dependent on axial length, anterior chamber depth and Pkadj. CONCLUSION: Refractive outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of the multifocal IOL Lentis Mplus LS-312 can be optimized by minimizing the keratometric error and by estimating ELP using a mathematical expression dependent on anatomical factors.

Errors Associated to Keratoconus Grading using Systems based on Corneal Power

Purpose: To analyze and define the possible errors that may be introduced in keratoconus classification when the keratometric corneal power is used in such classification. Materials and methods: Retrospective study including a total of 44 keratoconus eyes. A comprehensive ophthalmologic examination was performed in all cases, which included a corneal analysis with the Pentacam system (Oculus). Classical keratometric corneal power (Pk), Gaussian corneal power (Pc Gauss), True Net Power (TNP) (Gaussian power neglecting the corneal thickness effect), and an adjusted keratometric corneal power (Pkadj) (keratometric power considering a variable keratometric index) were calculated. All cases included in the study were classified according to five different classification systems: Alió-Shabayek, Amsler-Krumeich, Rabinowitz-McDonnell, collaborative longitudinal evaluation of keratoconus (CLEK), and McMahon. Results: When Pk and Pkadj were compared, differences in the type of grading of keratoconus cases was found in 13.6% of eyes when the Alió-Shabayek or the Amsler-Krumeich systems were used. Likewise, grading differences were observed in 22.7% of eyes with the Rabinowitz-McDonnell and McMahon classification systems and in 31.8% of eyes with the CLEK classification system. All reclassified cases using Pkadj were done in a less severe stage, indicating that the use of Pk may lead to the classification of a cornea as keratoconus, being normal. In general, the results obtained using Pkadj, Pc Gauss or the TNP were equivalent. Differences between Pkadj and Pc Gauss were within ± 0.7D. Conclusion: The use of classical keratometric corneal power may lead to incorrect grading of the severity of keratoconus, with a trend to a more severe grading.

Clinical Validation of Adjusted Corneal Power in Patients with Previous Myopic Lasik Surgery

Purpose. To validate clinically a new method for estimating the corneal power (P,) using a variable keratometric index (nkadj) in eyes with previous laser refractive surgery. Setting. University of Alicante and Medimar International Hospital (Oftalmar), Alicante, (Spain). Design. Retrospective case series. Methods. This retrospective study comprised 62 eyes of 62 patients that had undergone myopic LASIK surgery. An algorithm for the calculation of 11kadj was used for the estimation of the adjusted keratometric corneal power (Pkadj). This value was compared with the classical keratometric corneal power (Pk), the True Net Power (TNP), and the Gaussian corneal power (PcGauss). Likewise, Pkadj was compared with other previously described methods. Results. Differences between PcGauss and P, values obtained with all methods evaluated were statistically significant (p < 0.01). Differences between Pkadj and PcGauss were in the limit of clinical significance (p < 0.01, loA [ - 0.33,0.60] D). Differences between Pkadj and TNP were not statistically and clinically significant (p = 0.319, loA [- 0.50,0.44] D). Differences between Pkadj and previously described methods were statistically significant (p < 0.01), except with PcHaigisL (p = 0.09, loA [ - 0.37,0.29] D). Conclusion. The use of the adjusted keratometric index (nkadj) is a valid method to estimate the central corneal power in corneas with previous myopic laser refractive surgery, providing results comparable to PcHaigisL.

Positional accommodative intraocular lens power error induced by the estimation of the corneal power and the effective lens position

Purpose: To evaluate the predictability of the refractive correction achieved with a positional accommodating intraocular lenses (IOL) and to develop a potential optimization of it by minimizing the error associated with the keratometric estimation of the corneal power and by developing a predictive formula for the effective lens position (ELP). Materials and Methods: Clinical data from 25 eyes of 14 patients (age range, 52–77 years) and undergoing cataract surgery with implantation of the accommodating IOL Crystalens HD (Bausch and Lomb) were retrospectively reviewed. In all cases, the calculation of an adjusted IOL power (PIOLadj) based on Gaussian optics considering the residual refractive error was done using a variable keratometric index value (nkadj) for corneal power estimation with and without using an estimation algorithm for ELP obtained by multiple regression analysis (ELPadj). PIOLadj was compared to the real IOL power implanted (PIOLReal, calculated with the SRK-T formula) and also to the values estimated by the Haigis, HofferQ, and Holladay I formulas. Results: No statistically significant differences were found between PIOLReal and PIOLadj when ELPadj was used (P = 0.10), with a range of agreement between calculations of 1.23 D. In contrast, PIOLReal was significantly higher when compared to PIOLadj without using ELPadj and also compared to the values estimated by the other formulas. Conclusions: Predictable refractive outcomes can be obtained with the accommodating IOL Crystalens HD using a variable keratometric index for corneal power estimation and by estimating ELP with an algorithm dependent on anatomical factors and age.