Purpose
To evaluate the impact of posterior corneal astigmatism on outcomes with toric intraocular lenses (IOLs).
Setting
Cullen Eye Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.
Design
Case series.
Methods
Corneal astigmatism was measured using 5 devices before and 3 weeks after cataract surgery. Toric IOL alignment was recorded at surgery and at the slitlamp 3 weeks postoperatively. The actual corneal astigmatism was calculated based on refractive astigmatism 3 weeks postoperatively and the effective toric power calculated with the Holladay 2 formula. The prediction error was calculated as the difference between the astigmatism measured by each device and the actual corneal astigmatism. Vector analysis was used in all calculations.
Results
With the IOLMaster, Lenstar, Atlas, manual keratometer, and Galilei (combined Placido–dual Scheimpflug analyzer), the mean prediction errors (D) were, respectively, 0.59 @ 89.7, 0.48 @ 91.2, 0.51 @ 78.7, 0.62 @ 97.2, and 0.57 @ 93.9 for with-the-rule (WTR) astigmatism (60 to 120 degrees), and 0.17 @ 86.2, 0.23 @ 77.7, 0.23 @ 91.4, 0.41 @ 58.4, and 0.12 @ 7.3 for against-the-rule (ATR) astigmatism (0 to 30 degrees and 150 to 180 degrees). In the WTR eyes, there were significant WTR prediction errors (0.5 to 0.6 diopters [D]) by all devices. In ATR eyes, WTR prediction errors were 0.2 to 0.3 D by all devices except the Placido–dual Scheimpflug analyzer (all P<.05 with Bonferroni correction).
Conclusions
Corneal astigmatism was overestimated in WTR by all devices and underestimated in ATR by all except the Placido–dual Scheimpflug analyzer. A new toric IOL nomogram is proposed.
Financial Disclosure
Drs. Koch, Weikert, and Wang received research support from Ziemer USA, Inc. Dr. Koch has a financial interest with Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Abbott Medical Optics, Inc., Optimedica Corp., and Ziemer USA, Inc. No other author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
