Back to Journals » Clinical Ophthalmology » Volume 14

Clinical Outcomes of Toric Intraocular Lenses: Differences in Expected Outcomes When Using a Calculator That Considers Effective Lens Position and the Posterior Cornea vs One That Does Not

Authors Yeu E, Cheung AY, Potvin R

Received 30 January 2020

Accepted for publication 6 March 2020

Published 16 March 2020 Volume 2020:14 Pages 815—822

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S247800

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Scott Fraser


Elizabeth Yeu,1 Albert Y Cheung,1 Richard Potvin2

1Virginia Eye Consultants, Norfolk, VA, USA; 2Science in Vision, Akron, NY, USA

Correspondence: Elizabeth Yeu
Virginia Eye Consultants, 241 Corporate Blvd., Norfolk, VA 23502, USA
Tel +1 757-742-3902
Email eyeulin@gmail.com

Purpose: To compare toric intraocular lens (IOL) outcome accuracy after using an online toric calculator that accounted for posterior corneal astigmatism versus a traditional calculator that only accounted for anterior corneal astigmatism.
Patients and Methods: This was a single-arm, non-masked, non-randomized prospective study in a single private practice in Norfolk, Virginia, USA, evaluating clinical outcomes of toric IOL implantation based on a calculator that considered posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA) and effective lens position (ELP). Of interest was the distribution of the residual refraction (sphere and cylinder) at 40– 70 days postoperative. Residual refractive cylinder (RRC) was compared to the back-calculated theoretical results using a legacy calculator that did not consider PCA. Distance visual acuity (best-corrected and uncorrected) and the manifest refraction were also measured, along with preoperative and postoperative keratometry.
Results: Forty-six eyes of 34 subjects were available for analysis. All eyes had a spherical equivalent refraction within 0.5D of intended. Uncorrected visual acuity was 20/25 or better in 86% of eyes targeted for emmetropia. Residual cylinder was 0.50D or less in 96% of eyes, with a maximum of 0.75D measured. The difference between residual cylinder and the expected cylinder from calculations was significantly lower for the calculator that included consideration of PCA and ELP relative to the one that did not.
Conclusion: Use of a toric IOL calculator that includes consideration of posterior corneal astigmatism is recommended to optimize clinical outcomes.

Keywords: posterior corneal astigmatism, cylinder, residual refraction, toric calculator


Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]