Accuracy of different intraocular lens power calculation formulas in cataract patients with shallow anterior chamber: a meta-analysis
10.3760/cma.j.cn115989-20200701-00472
- VernacularTitle:不同人工晶状体屈光度计算公式在浅前房白内障患者中的准确性meta分析
- Author:
Xiaoyu LI
1
;
Li YANG
;
Yue HAI
;
Qingqing TAN
;
Changjun LAN
;
Xuan LIAO
Author Information
1. 川北医学院附属医院眼科 川北医学院眼视光医学院，南充 637000
- Keywords:
Cataract;
Lenses, intraocular;
Refractive errors;
Anterior chamber;
Meta-analysis
- From:
Chinese Journal of Experimental Ophthalmology
2023;41(6):576-581
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To systematically compare the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas in cataract patients with shallow anterior chamber.Methods:A comprehensive literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the Chinese databases including CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases.The peer-reviewed literature on the accuracy of IOL power calculation formulas in cataract patients with shallow anterior chamber was searched from the establishment of the database until August 2020.Literature screening, data extraction and quality assessment were performed according to inclusion and exclusion criteria.The mean difference ( MD) of mean absolute error (MAE) among different formulas was analyzed.Meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.3 software. Results:Seven studies involving 499 eyes were included.The accuracy of six formulas, Barrett Universal Ⅱ, Haigis, SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1 and Holladay 2, was evaluated.The MAE of Barrett Universal Ⅱ was significantly lower than that of Hoffer Q ( MD=0.11 D; 95% CI: 0.05-0.17 D; P<0.001), Haigis ( MD=0.08 D; 95% CI: 0.03-0.13 D; P=0.002), and Holladay 2 ( MD=-0.06 D; 95% CI: -0.11--0.01 D; P=0.020). No significant difference was found in the remaining pairwise comparisons (all at P>0.05). Conclusions:The Barrett Universal Ⅱ formula is more accurate than Hoffer Q, Haigis, and Holladay 2 formulas in predicting IOL power in cataract patients with shallow anterior chamber.
