Intraocular Lens Power Calculations in Eyes with Previous Corneal Refractive Surgery

Intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations are less accurate in eyes that have undergone corneal refractive surgery. A wide range of methods have been proposed. We reviewed the methods and outcomes of IOL power calculations in eyes with previous LASIK, excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), or radial keratotomy (RK). The PubMed database was searched for articles that (1) discuss methods and outcomes of IOL power calculation in eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery and (2) evaluate the outcomes of toric, multifocal, or extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) IOLs in these eyes. We excluded review articles, case reports or case studies, and non-English reports. Seventy full-text articles were included in this review. Three categories of methods exist based on whether and how they use historical data acquired before the corneal refractive surgery. The American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) postrefractive IOL calculator incorporates many commonly used methods. In eyes with previous myopic LASIK or PRK, hyperopic LASIK or PRK, and RK, 0% to 85%, 38.1% to 71.9%, and 29% to 87.5% of eyes, respectively, showed refractive prediction errors within ±0.5 diopter (D); in eyes with toric IOL implantation that met certain inclusion criteria, 80%, 84%, and 69% of eyes, respectively, achieved postoperative astigmatism of 0.50 D or less. Intraocular lenses with negative spherical aberration (SA) will reduce the positive corneal spherical aberration induced in eyes by myopic LASIK or PRK or by RK. Intraocular lenses with 0 SA on average best match corneal SA in eyes with prior hyperopic LASIK or PRK. Studies have reported excellent outcomes of postrefractive eyes implanted with multifocal or EDOF IOLs; however, corneal topographic enrollment criteria were not specified. Despite availability of new measurement technologies and development of new IOL calculation formulas, further advances are needed to improve outcomes of cataract surgery in eyes that have undergone corneal refractive surgery. Tools like the ASCRS postrefractive IOL calculator are useful for the clinician by incorporating a variety of formulas. Toric, EDOF, and multifocal IOLs may provide excellent outcomes in selected cases that meet certain corneal topographic criteria. Intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations are less accurate in eyes that have undergone corneal refractive surgery. A wide range of methods have been proposed. We reviewed the methods and outcomes of IOL power calculations in eyes with previous LASIK, excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), or radial keratotomy (RK). The PubMed database was searched for articles that (1) discuss methods and outcomes of IOL power calculation in eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery and (2) evaluate the outcomes of toric, multifocal, or extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) IOLs in these eyes. We excluded review articles, case reports or case studies, and non-English reports. Seventy full-text articles were included in this review. Three categories of methods exist based on whether and how they use historical data acquired before the corneal refractive surgery. The American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) postrefractive IOL calculator incorporates many commonly used methods. In eyes with previous myopic LASIK or PRK, hyperopic LASIK or PRK, and RK, 0% to 85%, 38.1% to 71.9%, and 29% to 87.5% of eyes, respectively, showed refractive prediction errors within ±0.5 diopter (D); in eyes with toric IOL implantation that met certain inclusion criteria, 80%, 84%, and 69% of eyes, respectively, achieved postoperative astigmatism of 0.50 D or less. Intraocular lenses with negative spherical aberration (SA) will reduce the positive corneal spherical aberration induced in eyes by myopic LASIK or PRK or by RK. Intraocular lenses with 0 SA on average best match corneal SA in eyes with prior hyperopic LASIK or PRK. Studies have reported excellent outcomes of postrefractive eyes implanted with multifocal or EDOF IOLs; however, corneal topographic enrollment criteria were not specified. Despite availability of new measurement technologies and development of new IOL calculation formulas, further advances are needed to improve outcomes of cataract surgery in eyes that have undergone corneal refractive surgery. Tools like the ASCRS postrefractive IOL calculator are useful for the clinician by incorporating a variety of formulas. Toric, EDOF, and multifocal IOLs may provide excellent outcomes in selected cases that meet certain corneal topographic criteria. Accurate selection of intraocular lens (IOL) power is challenging in eyes that have undergone corneal refractive surgery, such as excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), LASIK, or radial keratotomy (RK). Advances in this area are crucial for meeting the increasing expectations of these patients undergoing cataract surgery. In eyes with previous LASIK, PRK, or RK, 2 factors primarily contribute to challenges in IOL power calculations: (1) difficulties in obtaining accurate corneal refractive power and (2) problem in predicting the effective lens position. Three factors contribute to inaccurate corneal refractive power estimation. First, inaccurate measurement of anterior corneal curvature by standard keratometry or corneal topography or tomography can occur as a result of the large variation in corneal curvatures within the center area. Second, inaccurate calculation of total corneal power from the anterior corneal curvature can result from using the standardized value for the refractive index of cornea (1.3375). Procedures that remove corneal tissue, such as PRK or LASIK, change the relationship between the front and back surfaces of the cornea, and the use of the standardized value for refractive index of the cornea is no longer valid. Third, radial keratotomy induces changes in posterior corneal curvature that are hard to measure and contribute IOL calculation errors. Problems predicting the effective lens position include that many IOL calculation formulas use corneal power values in their calculations to predict the effective lens position (ELP). After LASIK, PRK, or RK, corneal power is altered, and the predicted ELP would be misleading if the postoperative corneal power is used. For example, in eyes that have undergone myopic LASIK or PRK, the flattened corneal power values cause these formulas to predict a falsely shallow ELP and to calculate insufficient IOL power, yielding a postoperative hyperopic surprise. To avoid the ELP-related IOL prediction error, Aramberri1Aramberri J. Intraocular lens power calculation after corneal refractive surgery: double-K method.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003; 29: 2063-2068Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (250) Google Scholar proposed the double-K method. With the double-K version of the IOL formulas, the corneal power before refractive surgery is used to estimate the ELP, and the corneal power after refractive surgery is used to calculate the IOL power. This approach was used previously by Holladay in his Holladay Consultant Program. In a previous study,2Koch D.D. Wang L. Calculating IOL power in eyes that have had refractive surgery.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003; 29: 2039-2042Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (89) Google Scholar we found that the ELP-related IOL prediction errors are greatest for the Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff trial formula, followed by the Holladay 2, Holladay 1, and Hoffer Q formulas; the errors decrease in long eyes and increase with increasing amount of refractive correction. Several studies have shown that the double-K method improves the accuracy of IOL power calculation after LASIK or PRK.1Aramberri J. Intraocular lens power calculation after corneal refractive surgery: double-K method.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003; 29: 2063-2068Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (250) Google Scholar,3Awwad S.T. Kilby A. Bowman R.W. et al.The accuracy of the double-K adjustment for third-generation intraocular lens calculation formulas in previous keratorefractive surgery eyes.Eye Contact Lens. 2013; 39: 220-227Crossref PubMed Scopus (5) Google Scholar,4Wang L. Booth M.A. Koch D.D. Comparison of intraocular lens power calculation methods in eyes that have undergone laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis.Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2004; 102: 189-196PubMed Google Scholar An alternative approach is to predict ELP without including corneal power in the calculation; examples include the Haigis and Haigis-L and Shammas.5Haigis W. Lege B. Miller N. Schneider B. Comparison of immersion ultrasound biometry and partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens calculation according to Haigis.Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2000; 238: 765-773Crossref PubMed Scopus (484) Google Scholar, 6Haigis W. Intraocular lens calculation after refractive surgery for myopia: Haigis-L formula.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008; 34: 1658-1663Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (155) Google Scholar, 7Shammas H.J. Shammas M.C. No-history method of intraocular lens power calculation for cataract surgery after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis.J Cataract Refractive Surg. 2007; 33: 31-36Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (104) Google Scholar The objective of this review was to summarize (1) methods that have been proposed for IOL power calculation in these eyes, (2) refractive outcomes that one might expect with various approaches, and (3) issues regarding selecting different IOL types for these eyes. The PubMed database was searched using different combinations of the following key words: cataract surgery, intraocular lens power calculation, post-refractive surgery, LASIK, PRK, RK, intraoperative wavefront aberrometry, light-adjustable intraocular lens, intraocular lens power adjustment by a femtosecond laser, corneal spherical aberration in post-refractive eyes, spherical vs. aspherical IOLs, toric IOL, multifocal lens, extended depth of focus lens, extended range of vision intraocular lens, and small-aperture IOL. A total of 292 records were identified (Fig 1). The following records were excluded: duplicates, review articles, meta-analysis articles, case reports or case studies, and non-English reports. Seventy full-text articles were reviewed and included in qualitative synthesis. The principal summary measures were as follows: (1) methods of IOL power calculations in eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery, (2) percentage of eyes with refractive prediction errors within ±0.5 diopter (D), (3) percentage of eyes with postoperative refractive astigmatism of 0.50 D or less in eyes with toric IOL implantation, and (4) corneal topographic enrollment criteria for toric, multifocal, and extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) IOL implantation. Many formulas and approaches have been proposed to improve the accuracy of IOL power calculation in eyes after corneal refractive surgery. Three categories of methods exist based on whether and how they use historical data acquired before the corneal refractive surgery. Methods in this group include (1) the clinical history method, which was the first approach to be described,8Holladay J.T. Consultations in refractive surgery [letter].Refract Corneal Surg. 1989; 5: 203Google Scholar (2) the Feiz-Mannis IOL power adjustment method,9Feiz V. Mannis M.J. Garcia-Ferrer F. et al.Intraocular lens power calculation after laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia and hyperopia: a standardized approach.Cornea. 2001; 20: 792-797Crossref PubMed Scopus (144) Google Scholar and (3) the corneal bypass method.10Walter K.A. Gagnon M.R. Hoopes Jr., P.C. Dickinson P.J. Accurate intraocular lens power calculation after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis, bypassing corneal power.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006; 32: 425-429Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (75) Google Scholar Several methods use a combination of the surgically induced refractive change (ΔMR) and current corneal power values. These methods modify either (1) corneal power measurements at the time the patient seeks treatment for cataract surgery or (2) calculated IOL power based on ΔMR induced by the LASIK or PRK surgery.1.Several methods have been proposed to modify the corneal power values obtained from different corneal topographers based on the ΔMR. These methods include the Adjusted EyeSys EffRP from the EyeSys topographer (EyeSys Vision, Houston, TX), the Adjusted Atlas Ring Values and Adjusted Atlas Zone Value from the Atlas 9000 topographer (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany), and adjusted average central corneal power from the Topographic Modeling System topographer (Topographic Modeling System; Tomey Corp., Phoenix, AZ).11Wang L. Booth M.A. Koch D.D. Comparison of intraocular lens power calculation methods in eyes that have undergone LASIK.Ophthalmology. 2004; 111: 1825-1831Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (141) Google Scholar, 12Awwad S.T. Dwarakanathan S. Bowman R.W. et al.Intraocular lens power calculation after radial keratotomy: estimating the refractive corneal power.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007; 33: 1045-1050Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (33) Google Scholar, 13Awwad S.T. Manasseh C. Bowman R.W. et al.Intraocular lens power calculation after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis: estimating the corneal refractive power.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008; 34: 1070-1076Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (38) Google Scholar The Barrett True-K formula also uses the current corneal power values from the ocular biometers and the refraction before and after the corneal refractive surgery. This formula is not published, and it is not clear how the amount of refractive change is used.2.The Masket formula calculates the IOL power using the current corneal power value and then adjusts it by 32.6% of the ΔMR.14Masket S. Masket S.E. Simple regression formula for intraocular lens power adjustment in eyes requiring cataract surgery after excimer laser photoablation.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006; 32: 430-434Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (125) Google Scholar The Modified Masket formula is a formula modified by Hill based on the Masket formula. Several methods have been proposed that require no historical data. The formulas fall into 2 categories: (1) formulas that use anterior corneal power measurements and adjust these values based on either regression analysis or assumed posterior corneal power and (2) formulas based on corneal power measurements of both the anterior and posterior corneal surfaces. 1.Wang-Koch-Maloney: Using this method, the Atlas 4-mm zone value is obtained from the Atlas topographer.11Wang L. Booth M.A. Koch D.D. Comparison of intraocular lens power calculation methods in eyes that have undergone LASIK.Ophthalmology. 2004; 111: 1825-1831Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (141) Google Scholar This value then is converted to anterior corneal power by multiplying it by 376.0/337.5, or 1.114. An assumed posterior corneal power of 5.59 D then is subtracted from this product: Adjusted corneal power = (Atlas 4-mm zone × 1.114) – 5.59.2.Shammas Method: Using regression analysis, this method estimates the corneal power after LASIK or PRK by adjusting the measured postoperative keratometry readings after LASIK or PRK:7Shammas H.J. Shammas M.C. No-history method of intraocular lens power calculation for cataract surgery after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis.J Cataract Refractive Surg. 2007; 33: 31-36Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (104) Google Scholar,15Shammas H.J. Shammas M.C. Garabet A. et al.Correcting the corneal power measurements for intraocular lens power calculations after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis.Am J Ophthalmol. 2003; 136: 426-432Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (124) Google Scholar Adjusted corneal power = 1.14 × Postoperative keratometry reading – 6.8.3.Haigis-L: This formula uses a regression equation to correct the corneal radius after LASIK obtained from the IOLMaster (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) or other biometer, based on the corneal powers calculated from the historical method, and IOL power then is calculated using the Haigis formula:6Haigis W. Intraocular lens calculation after refractive surgery for myopia: Haigis-L formula.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008; 34: 1658-1663Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (155) Google Scholar Corrected corneal radius = 331.5 / (–5.1625 × Corneal radius after LASIK with IOLMaster + 82.2603 – 0.35).4.Potvin-Hill Pentacam: Using regression analysis, this method estimates the corneal power after LASIK or PRK using the TNP_Apex_Zone40 value from the Pentacam (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany), axial length (AL), and anterior chamber depth (ACD) value.16Potvin R. Hill W. New algorithm for intraocular lens power calculations after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis based on rotating Scheimpflug camera data.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015; 41: 339-347Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (35) Google Scholar For IOL power calculation, the Shammas-PL formula7Shammas H.J. Shammas M.C. No-history method of intraocular lens power calculation for cataract surgery after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis.J Cataract Refractive Surg. 2007; 33: 31-36Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (104) Google Scholar is used.5.Barrett True-K No-History formula: This is a modified version of the Barrett True-K formula that can be used when the amount of refractive correction is not available. For IOL power calculation, the Universal II formula is used. Details regarding the design of the Barrett True-K and Universal II formulas are not published. With advanced technology, new devices that measure both anterior and posterior corneal surfaces have become available, such as the Scheimpflug and OCT devices.1.OCT–based IOL calculation formula: Using the RTVue (Optovue, Inc., Fremont, CA), Tang et al17Tang M. Li Y. Huang D. An intraocular lens power calculation formula based on optical coherence tomography: a pilot study.J Refract Surg. 2010; 26: 430-437Crossref PubMed Scopus (29) Google Scholar developed an OCT-based IOL calculation formula. Based on the anterior and posterior corneal powers and the central corneal thickness, net corneal power is calculated using the Gaussian thick lens formula. Then, for IOL power calculation, the net corneal power is converted to an effective corneal power based on linear regression analysis. The vergence formula is used for IOL power calculation.2.Total keratometry: The total keratometry from the IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) is a new measurement that combines telecentric keratometry and swept-source OCT technology for the assessment of anterior and posterior corneal curvatures.18Wang L. Spektor T. de Souza R.G. Koch D.D. Evaluation of total keratometry and its accuracy for intraocular lens power calculation in eyes after corneal refractive surgery.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2019; 45: 1416-1421Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (37) Google Scholar 1.Postrefractive IOL calculator at American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS): This calculator can be used for eyes that have undergone previous myopic LASIK or PRK, hyperopic LASIK or PRK, or RK.19Wang L. Hill W. Koch D.D. Evaluation of intraocular lens power prediction methods using the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons post-keratorefractive intraocular lens power calculator.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010; 36: 1466-1473Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (93) Google Scholar Depending on the availability of historical data, the IOL calculator for eyes with previous myopic or hyperopic LASIK or PRK categorizes the various calculation methods into 2 groups: (1) methods using ΔMR and corneal measurements at the time of cataract surgery and (2) methods using no prior data. Pop-up windows are included to explain each method in detail.2.Barrett True-K formula at Asia-Pacific Association of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons: The Barrett True K formula was developed by Graham Barrett from Australia. It is accessible from the Asia-Pacific Association of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons website (www.apacrs.org). This formula also has been incorporated into the postrefractive IOL calculator at ascrs.org. The Optiwave Refractive Analysis (ORA; Alcon Laboratories, Fort Worth, TX) is an intraoperative wavefront aberrometer designed to calculate IOL power based on aphakic refraction obtained during surgery after the cataract has been removed.20Ianchulev T. Hoffer K.J. Yoo S.H. et al.Intraoperative refractive biometry for predicting intraocular lens power calculation after prior myopic refractive surgery.Ophthalmology. 2014; 121: 56-60Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (78) Google Scholar Using infrared light and Talbot-Moiré interferometry, the system calculates the optimal IOL power based on the aphakic spherical equivalent and the axial length, keratometry, and corneal diameter measured before surgery. Estimated ELP is calculated using a proprietary algorithm. The light-adjustable lens (RxSight, Inc., Pasadena, CA) is the first Food and Drug Administration-approved product from an entirely new category of IOLs. The light-adjustable lens enables residual spherical and cylindrical errors to be corrected or adjusted after the postoperative refraction has stabilized.21Brierley L. Refractive results after implantation of a light-adjustable intraocular lens in postrefractive surgery cataract patients.Ophthalmology. 2013; 120: 1968-1972Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (20) Google Scholar, 22Villegas E.A. Alcon E. Rubio E. et al.Refractive accuracy with light-adjustable intraocular lenses.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014; 40: 1075-1084Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (17) Google Scholar, 23Ford J. Werner L. Mamalis N. Adjustable intraocular lens power technology.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014; 40: 1205-1223Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (37) Google Scholar When the light-adjustable lens is exposed to targeted ultraviolet light, a photoinitiator is activated, resulting in polymerization of a macromer in the lens. The unpolymerized macromer then diffuses to the treated area, producing a predictable shape change that alters the refractive power of the lens. When the targeted refraction is achieved, the shape of the lens is locked in by irradiating and thereby consuming the remaining unreacted photoinitiators and macromers.23Ford J. Werner L. Mamalis N. Adjustable intraocular lens power technology.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014; 40: 1205-1223Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (37) Google Scholar The Perfect Lens (Perfect Lens, LLC, Irvine, CA) is another technology under development for modifying IOL power in situ.24Sahler R. Bille J.F. Enright S. et al.Creation of a refractive lens within an existing intraocular lens using a femtosecond laser.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016; 42: 1207-1215Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar With this technology, a femtosecond laser is used to increase the hydrophilicity, and thus, the refractive index and refractive characteristics of defined zones within a standard IOL. The lens uses a phase-wrapping technique for power adjustment, which is based on a theoretically perfect Fresnel lens. By changing the relative heights and profiles of the concentric refractive zones with the femtosecond laser, one can modify spherical power, asphericity, toricity, and multifocality, with the goal being the ability to accomplish this with a repeatable, in-office procedure. Another company that is using refractive index shaping is Clerio (Clerio Vision, Rochester, NY); their publicly reported work has been on altering corneal power, but IOL power adjustment also is being studied. Obviously numerous parameters exist for evaluating the accuracy of IOL calculations,25Wang L. Koch D.D. Hill W. Abulafia A. Pursuing perfection in IOL calculations: III. Criteria for analyzing outcomes.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017; 43: 999-1002Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (78) Google Scholar but perhaps the most relevant and easy to use is the percentage of eyes within a given distance from the intended targeted refraction. For this article, we have chosen the percentage of eyes within 0.5 D of target as the primary outcome because uncorrected acuity and patient satisfaction are likely to be high with this outcome, regardless of the refractive target.26Holladay J.T. Moran J.R. Kezirian G.M. Analysis of aggregate surgically induced refractive change, prediction error, and intraocular astigmatism.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001; 27: 61-79Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (235) Google Scholar We also include the refractive mean absolute error (MAE), median absolute error (MedAE), or both if reported in these studies. Overall, wide ranges of outcomes are reported in various studies. Best outcomes in most studies did not exceed 75% accuracy within 0.5 D of target. In studies using the ASCRS postrefractive IOL calculator, with methods using ΔMR, the reported accuracy of refractive prediction errors within ±0.5 D ranged from 52% to 85%, MAEs ranged from 0.28 to 0.52 D, and MedAEs ranged from 0.21 to 0.48 D. With only methods using no prior data, the accuracy of prediction errors within ±0.5 D ranged from 43.1% to 85%, MAEs ranged from 0.22 to 0.92 D, and MedAEs ranged from 0.31 to 0.58 D. The average value from all formulas available on the ASCRS calculator produced accuracy within ±0.5 D of 45% to 72%, MAE of 0.45 to 0.84 D, and MedAEs of 0.28 to 0.35 D (Table 1).16Potvin R. Hill W. New algorithm for intraocular lens power calculations after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis based on rotating Scheimpflug camera data.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015; 41: 339-347Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (35) Google Scholar,19Wang L. Hill W. Koch D.D. Evaluation of intraocular lens power prediction methods using the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons post-keratorefractive intraocular lens power calculator.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010; 36: 1466-1473Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (93) Google Scholar,27Wang L. Tang M. Huang D. et al.Comparison of newer intraocular lens power calculation methods for eyes after corneal refractive surgery.Ophthalmology. 2015; 122: 2443-2449Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (77) Google Scholar, 28Abulafia A. Hill W.E. Koch D.D. et al.Accuracy of the Barrett True-K formula for intraocular lens power prediction after laser in situ keratomileusis or photorefractive keratectomy for myopia.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016; 42: 363-369Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (67) Google Scholar, 29Fram N.R. Masket S. Wang L. Comparison of intraoperative aberrometry, OCT-based IOL formula, Haigis-L, and Masket formulae for IOL power calculation after laser vision correction.Ophthalmology. 2015; 122: 1096-1101Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (54) Google Scholar, 30Vrijman V. Abulafia A. van der Linden J.W. et al.Evaluation of different IOL calculation formulas of the ASCRS calculator in eyes after corneal refractive laser surgery for myopia with multifocal IOL implantation.J Refract Surg. 2019; 35: 54-59Crossref PubMed Scopus (16) Google Scholar, 31Yang R. Yeh A. George M.R. et al.Comparison of intraocular lens power calculation methods after myopic laser refractive surgery without previous refractive surgery data.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013; 39: 1327-1335Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (35) Google ScholarTable 1Percentage of Eyes with Refractive Prediction Errors ±0.5 Diopter, Refractive Mean Absolute Error (Diopters), and Median Absolute Error (Diopter) in Eyes with Previous Myopic LASIK or Photorefractive Keratectomy Using the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery Postrefractive Intraocular Lens CalculatorStudiesNo. of EyesMethods Using Change in Manifest RefractionMethods Using No Prior DataAverage of All FormulasAdjusted Atlas (4-mm Zone)MasketModified MasketBarrett True-KWang-Koch-MaloneyShammasHaigis-LPotvin-Hill PentacamOCTBarrett True-K No HistoryPotvin and Hill16Potvin R. Hill W. New algorithm for intraocular lens power calculations after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis based on rotating Scheimpflug camera data.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015; 41: 339-347Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (35) Google Scholar101 RPE ±0.5 D (%)52595450575866 MedAE (D)——————— MAE (D)———————Wang et al19Wang L. Hill W. Koch D.D. Evaluation of intraocular lens power prediction methods using the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons post-keratorefractive intraocular lens power calculator.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010; 36: 1466-1473Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (93) Google Scholar72 RPE ±0.5 D (%)64∗Adjusted Atlas 0–3 method.576758606072 MedAE (D)——————— MAE (D)———————Wang et al27Wang L. Tang M. Huang D. et al.Comparison of newer intraocular lens power calculation methods for eyes after corneal refractive surgery.Ophthalmology. 2015; 122: 2443-2449Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (77) Google Scholar104 RPE ±0.5 D (%)50.052.955.868.358.766.3 MedAE (D)—————— MAE (D)0.510.480.390.350.420.35Abulafia et al28Abulafia A. Hill W.E. Koch D.D. et al.Accuracy of the Barrett True-K formula for intraocular lens power prediction after laser in situ keratomileusis or photorefractive keratectomy for myopia.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016; 42: 363-369Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (67) Google Scholar58 RPE ±0.5 D (%)60.360.353.467.243.155.248.358.6 MedAE (D)0.510.480.520.430.630.600.630.46 MAE (D)0.380.320.480.330.530.460.580.34Fram et al29Fram N.R. Masket S. Wang L. Comparison of intraoperative aberrometry, OCT-based IOL formula, Haigis-L, and Masket formulae for IOL power calculation after laser vision correction.Ophthalm