September 2016
Volume 57, Issue 12
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2016
Toric IOL Calculations for Refractive Cataract Surgery: The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Samir I Sayegh
    Ophthalmology, Eye Center/The Retina Center, Champaign, Illinois, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Samir Sayegh, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science September 2016, Vol.57, 925. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Samir I Sayegh; Toric IOL Calculations for Refractive Cataract Surgery: The Good, The Bad, and The Distorted. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2016;57(12):925.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose : With the rising success of toric intraocular (tIOL) lenses to correct astigmatism at the time of cataract surgery, the repertoire and range of such lenses have been rapidly expanding and associated calculators, specific to a manufacturer or more broadly defined, have proliferated. The purpose of this presentation is to examine the underlying algorithms and methods used, properly or improperly, by a variety of calculators. Good methodologies emerge but also some serious limitations and these are classified as good, bad or distorted.

Methods : The consideration of tIOL calculators were evaluated on the following criteria
1) Stand-alone-toric or allowing for sphere computation
2) Sequential computation of sphere then toric components or allowing for simultaneous optimization
3) Appropriate addition/combination of corneal astigmatism and surgically induced astigmatism
4) Allowing for additional astigmatism combination such as that created by second incision or limbal relaxing incision (LRI)
5) Use of fixed toricity ratio, variable toricity ratio or combination
6) Allowing for meridional methods and its propoer implementation
7) Appropriate interface with flexibility for re-computation and comparison
8) Ease of use of the graphical user interface (GUI)

Results : From the methods of computations examined, the majority of calculation environments were found to be stand-alone-toric implementing one portion of a necessarily sequential algorithm. The methods of combining astigmatism were generally appropriate but lacking generality, placing the burden of additional computations on the user. Some did not display cross cylinder necessitating indirect methods to elucidate results. Fixed toricity ratio methods were still broadly used despite a growing awareness of their inappropriateness. The meridional methods can be inappropriately applied, resulting in distorted results. Flexibility for re-computation and comparison was limited with few exceptions. There was a significant variability in user experience and quality/functionality of GUI, including the generation of a specific clear easy to use surgical plan.

Conclusions : While the use of tIOLs is growing rapidly with an increasing range and repertoire of options for the patients, calculation environments have continued to lag. A diagnostic approach and systematic classification of significant flaws is proposed along with suggested methods to address the shortcomings.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2016 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, Wash., May 1-5, 2016.


This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.