Efficacy of segmented axial length and artificial intelligence approaches to intraocular lens power calculation in short eyes

J Cataract Refract Surg. 2023 Jul 1;49(7):697-703. doi: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001185.

Abstract

Purpose: In short eyes, to compare the predictive accuracy of newer intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas using traditional and segmented axial length (AL) measurements.

Setting: Cullen Eye Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas and East Valley Ophthalmology, Mesa, Arizona.

Design: Multi-center retrospective case series.

Methods: Measurements from an optical biometer were collected in eyes with AL <22 mm. IOL power calculations were performed with 15 formulas using 2 AL values: (1) machine-reported traditional AL (Td-AL) and (2) segmented AL calculated with the Cooke-modified AL nomogram (CMAL). 1 AL method and 7 formulas were selected for pairwise analysis of mean absolute error (MAE) and root mean square absolute error (RMSAE).

Results: The study comprised 278 eyes. Compared with the Td-AL, the CMAL produced hyperopic shifts without differences in RMSAE. The ZEISS AI IOL Calculator (ZEISS AI), K6, Kane, Hill-RBF, Pearl-DGS, EVO, and Barrett Universal II (Barrett) formulas with Td-AL were compared pairwise. The ZEISS AI demonstrated smaller MAE and RMSAE than the Barrett, Pearl-DGS, and Kane. K6 had a smaller RMSAE than the Barrett formula. In 73 eyes with shallow anterior chamber depth, the ZEISS AI and Kane had a smaller RMSAE than the Barrett.

Conclusions: ZEISS AI outperformed Barrett, Pearl-DGS, and Kane. The K6 formula outperformed some formulas in selected parameters. Across all formulas, use of a segmented AL did not improve refractive predictions.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Axial Length, Eye
  • Biometry / methods
  • Humans
  • Lenses, Intraocular*
  • Optics and Photonics
  • Phacoemulsification*
  • Refraction, Ocular
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Visual Acuity