Clinical Evaluation of a New Approach for IOL Power Calculation in Keratoconus

Purpose: To obtain an expression of the adjusted IOL power (PIOLadj) in keratoconus eyes associated with minimal errors in IOL power calculation. Materials and methods: This retrospective study included a total of 25 eyes of 25 patients with ages ranging from 20 years to 76 years. The following IOLs were implanted: Acrysof IQ Toric, Acrysof SA60AT in 9 eyes, Sensar in 3 eyes, Tecnis 1 in 4 eyes, and Tecnis Toric in 2 eyes. The PIOLadj is based on Gauss equations, using adjusted keratometric index (nkadj) specific to keratoconus eyes. From this nkadj, an adjusted keratometric corneal power is calculated (Pkadj). The PIOLadj calculation was performed after estimating the effective lens position (ELP) using a mathematical expression obtained by multiple regression analysis (named ELPadj). Comparison between the PIOLadj and the real intraocular power implanted in each patient (PIOLreal) was carried out. Results: No significant differences between PIOLreal and PIOLadj were found. However, differences could be clinically relevant up to of 2.54 D as PIOLreal increases. But, in the range of PIOLreal between 0 and 20 D, differences were lower than 1.5 D, being most of them below 1 D. Conclusion: A new formula of IOL power calculation (PIOLadj) based on the use of an adjusted keratometric power (Pkadj) that considers a variable keratometric index due to the influence of the posterior corneal surface (nkadj) and adjusted effective lens position (ELPadj) is useful for estimating IOL power in low-to-moderate keratoconus, with more limitation in the most advanced keratoconus.David P Piñero is supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry, and Competitiveness within the program Ramón y Cajal, RYC-2016-20471

Algorithm for Correcting the Keratometric Error in the Estimation of the Corneal Power in Keratoconus Eyes after Accelerated Corneal Collagen Crosslinking

Purpose. To analyze the errors associated to corneal power calculation using the keratometric approach in keratoconus eyes after accelerated corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) surgery and to obtain a model for the estimation of an adjusted corneal refractive index (nkadj) minimizing such errors. Methods. Potential differences (ΔPc) among keratometric (Pk) and Gaussian corneal power (PGauss c ) were simulated. Three algorithms based on the use of nkadj for the estimation of an adjusted keratometric corneal power (Pkadj) were developed. The agreement between Pk(1.3375) (keratometric power using the keratometric index of 1.3375), PGauss c , and Pkadj was evaluated. The validity of the algorithm developed was investigated in 21 keratoconus eyes undergoing accelerated CXL. Results. Pk(1.3375) overestimated corneal power between 0.3 and 3.2D in theoretical simulations and between 0.8 and 2.9D in the clinical study (ΔPc). Three linear equations were defined for nkadj to be used for different ranges of r1c. In the clinical study, differences between Pkadj and PGauss c did not exceed ±0.8D nk = 1.3375. No statistically significant differences were found between Pkadj and PGauss c (p > 0 05) and Pk(1.3375) and Pkadj (p < 0 001). Conclusions. The use of the keratometric approach in keratoconus eyes after accelerated CXL can lead to significant clinical errors. These errors can be minimized with an adjusted keratometric approach

Clinical validation of an adjusted keratometric index for corneal power calculation in keratoconus patients [Abstract]

Resumen de la Memoria de Fin de Máster, Programa formativo en Biomedicina y tecnologías para la vida, Máster Universitario en Biomedicina, dirigida por Vicente J. Camps Sanchis y David P. Piñero Llorens

Optimización del cálculo de la potencia corneal y de lentes intraoculares en casos de patología corneal ectásica

Se analizaron los errores teóricos cometidos en el cálculo de la potencia corneal central en ojos con queratocono cuando se utilizaba la estimación queratométrica. Además, estos resultados fueron analizados clínicamente para confirmar este error de estimación. Posteriormente se calculó el índice queratométrico exacto que hacía cero el error cometido y se validó clínicamente el uso de un índice queratométrico variable que minimizaba el error cometido en el cálculo de la potencia corneal queratométrica. De esta manera se indicaron los posibles errores que podían cometerse en la clasificación del queratocono cuando se utilizaba una potencia corneal queratométrica en dichas clasificaciones. Además, se evaluó la influencia del error queratométrico en la estimación de la potencia de las lentes intraoculares en pacientes con queratocono, y a partir de ello, se desarrollaron y evaluaron de forma preliminar clínica los algoritmos necesarios para minimizar dicho error. Finalmente, se realizó un análisis teórico y clínico de los errores asociados al cálculo de la potencia corneal usando la estimación queratométrica en una población de queratoconos después de una cirugía de crosslinking y se obtuvo un modelo para la estimación del índice queratométrico ajustado para minimizar estos errores

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

Preliminary validation of an optimized algorithm for intraocular lens power calculation in keratoconus

This study aimed to evaluate the theoretical influence on intraocular lens power (PIOL) calculation of the use of keratometric approach for corneal power (Pc) calculation in keratoconus and to develop and validate an algorithm preliminarily to minimize this influence. Methods: Pcwas calculated theoretically with the classical keratometric approach, the Gaussian equation, and the keratometric approach using a variable keratometric index (nkadj) dependent on r1c(Pkadj). Differences in PIOL calculations (ΔPIOL) using keratometric and Gaussian Pcvalues were evaluated. Preliminary clinical validation of a PIOLalgorithm using Pkadj was performed in 13 keratoconus eyes. Results: PIOL underestimation was present if Pc was overestimated, and vice versa. Theoretical PIOLoverestimation up to −5.6 D and −6.2 D using Le Grand and Gullstrand eye models was found for a keratometric index of 1.3375. If nkadjwas used, maximal Δ PIOL was ±1.1 D, with most of the values ≤±0.6 D. Clinically, PIOLunder- and over-estimations ranged from −1.1 to − 0.4 D. No statistically significant differences were found between PIOL obtained with Pkadjand Gaussian equation (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The use of the keratometric Pcfor PIOL calculations in keratoconus can lead to significant errors that may be minimized using a Pkadj approach.The research leading to these results has received funding from the Generalitat Valenciana (Valencian Community, Spain) under the grant for emergent research groups with reference GV2014/086

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

Comparison of Four Intraocular Power Calculation Formulas in Keratoconus Eyes

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the differences in Intraocular Lens (IOL) power in keratoconus (KC) eyes between calculations obtained clinically with the most commonly used formulas in healthy eyes (SRK T, Holladay 1, Hoffer Q and Haigis) as well as to define predictive factors for such differences. Methods: This retrospective study comprised 43 keratoconus eyes of 22 patients with no previous ocular surgery. IOL powers were calculated with SRK T, Holladay 1, Hoffer Q, and Haigis formulas, considering the Effective Lens Position (ELP) of each formula and the desired refraction of 0 D (Rdes=0 D). Results: All differences between formulas were statistically significant and clinically relevant. Haigis formula always provided higher values compared to the rest of the formulas, with the highest differences observed when comparing Haigis with Hoffer (0.84 D) and Hoffer Q (1.17 D) formulas. The lowest difference was obtained for the comparison between SRK-T and Holladay 1 formulas (0.22 D). Differences of the Haigis formula compared to the rest were higher as the magnitude of the IOL power calculated decreased, becoming the patient more myopic. Increased differences between Haigis and Hoffer formulas were observed in eyes with deep anterior chambers, steeper anterior and posterior corneal surfaces, and high axial lengths. Conclusion: The most comparable results in IOL power in keratoconus are provided by the Holladay 1 and SRK T formulas, whereas the Haigis formula provides the most discrepant outcome. The consideration of the curvature of the second corneal surface in IOL power calculations in keratoconus may decrease the variability between calculation methods. However, other factors as anterior chamber depth or axial length are also relevant.The author David P Piñero has been supported by the Ministry of Economy, Industry, and Competitiveness of Spain within the program Ramón y Cajal, RYC-2016-20471

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