Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Focusing of Light in the Eye01:16

Focusing of Light in the Eye

3.3K
Light rays enter the eye through the cornea, a transparent dome-shaped tissue that is the eye's outermost layer. The cornea bends or refracts, light rays traveling to the pupil. The shape of the cornea determines how much of the light is bent and whether the image will be focused correctly on the retina at the back of the eye. Once the light has passed through both refraction layers, it converges into a single focal point onto a small area. This is where photoreceptors start transforming...
3.3K
Glaucoma: Overview01:25

Glaucoma: Overview

777
Glaucoma is an eye condition characterized by increased intraocular pressure that damages the retina and optic nerve, leading to irreversible blindness if left untreated. The human eye has various components, including the cornea, iris, pupil, lens, and optic nerve. Aqueous humor is secreted by the epithelium of the ciliary body in the posterior chamber and flows through the trabecular meshwork and canal of Schlemm, maintaining normal intraocular pressure. The trabecular meshwork and the canal...
777
Imaging Biological Samples with Optical Microscopy01:18

Imaging Biological Samples with Optical Microscopy

5.4K
Optical microscopy uses optic principles to provide detailed images of samples. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek designed the first compound optical microscope in the 17th century to visualize blood cells, bacteria, and yeast cells. In 1830, Joseph Jackson Lister created an essentially modern light microscope. The 20th century saw the development of microscopes with enhanced magnification and resolution.
In optical microscopy, the specimen to be viewed is placed on a glass slide and clipped on the stage...
5.4K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same authorSame journal

Exposure to and Comfort with Toric and Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: A Survey of Ophthalmology Residents.

Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)·2026
Same author

Changes in activity across the light-dark cycle during ethanol self-administration, extinction, and ethanol cue-induced reinstatement in rats.

Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior·2026
Same author

Refractive Outcomes of Cataract Surgery Using Zeiss Artificial Intelligence Calculator versus Barrett Universal II and Kane.

Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)·2026
Same author

Reliability of optimized lens constants from IOLCon and ULIB databases.

Journal of cataract and refractive surgery·2026
Same author

Real-World Visual and Refractive Results of Two Different Presbyopia Correcting Intraocular Lenses.

Journal of clinical medicine·2025
Same author

Predictive Correction Model for Corneal Back Surface Astigmatism With IOLMaster700 Keratometry Data in a Cataractous Population.

Clinical & experimental ophthalmology·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Sep 17, 2025

Scanning Light Scattering Profiler SLPS Based Methodology to Quantitatively Evaluate Forward and Backward Light Scattering from Intraocular Lenses
06:55

Scanning Light Scattering Profiler SLPS Based Methodology to Quantitatively Evaluate Forward and Backward Light Scattering from Intraocular Lenses

Published on: June 6, 2017

7.7K

Relative Behavior of Modern Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas Across a Realistic Range of Biometry Values.

Maxwell G Rossip1, Jordan Hastings1, Hendrik Burwinkel2

  • 1Department of Ophthalmology, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.

Clinical Ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)
|July 4, 2025
PubMed
Summary

Modern intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas show significant differences in refractive outcomes for eyes with axial lengths outside the 22.5–28.1 mm range. Formula choice impacts outcomes in over 10% of patients, particularly those with very short or long eyes.

Keywords:
IOLaxial lengthbiometrycataract

More Related Videos

Author Spotlight: Advancing Understanding of Age-Related Lens Stiffness Changes
05:19

Author Spotlight: Advancing Understanding of Age-Related Lens Stiffness Changes

Published on: April 5, 2024

2.5K
Simulating the Mechanics of Lens Accommodation via a Manual Lens Stretcher
05:14

Simulating the Mechanics of Lens Accommodation via a Manual Lens Stretcher

Published on: February 23, 2018

6.9K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Sep 17, 2025

Scanning Light Scattering Profiler SLPS Based Methodology to Quantitatively Evaluate Forward and Backward Light Scattering from Intraocular Lenses
06:55

Scanning Light Scattering Profiler SLPS Based Methodology to Quantitatively Evaluate Forward and Backward Light Scattering from Intraocular Lenses

Published on: June 6, 2017

7.7K
Author Spotlight: Advancing Understanding of Age-Related Lens Stiffness Changes
05:19

Author Spotlight: Advancing Understanding of Age-Related Lens Stiffness Changes

Published on: April 5, 2024

2.5K
Simulating the Mechanics of Lens Accommodation via a Manual Lens Stretcher
05:14

Simulating the Mechanics of Lens Accommodation via a Manual Lens Stretcher

Published on: February 23, 2018

6.9K

Area of Science:

  • Ophthalmology
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Optics

Background:

  • Accurate intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation is crucial for achieving desired refractive outcomes after cataract surgery.
  • Modern IOL formulas aim to improve refractive predictability by incorporating various biometric parameters.
  • Understanding the performance variations of these formulas across diverse ocular dimensions is essential for clinical practice.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate and compare the performance of contemporary IOL power calculation formulas.
  • To identify discrepancies in refractive predictions among formulas based on a wide spectrum of ocular biometric parameters.
  • To determine the axial lengths (ALs) at which different IOL formulas diverge in their power calculations.

Main Methods:

  • Modeled relationships between key biometric parameters (keratometry, anterior chamber depth, lens thickness, white-to-white) and axial length (AL).
  • Generated an artificial dataset of 170 eyes with anatomically realistic biometric distributions.
  • Calculated emmetropic IOL power using Barrett Universal II, Cooke K6, Kane, PEARL-DGS, HofferQST, EVO v2.0, Hill-RBF v3.0, and Zeiss AI formulas via the ESCRS IOL calculator.

Main Results:

  • Formulas showed less than 0.25 D difference in emmetropic IOL power and spherical equivalent predictions for ALs between 22.5 mm and 28.1 mm.
  • Predictions diverged by 0.25 D or more outside this AL range.
  • Differences in emmetropic IOL power exceeded 1.0 D for ALs < 19.5 mm across the evaluated formulas.

Conclusions:

  • An implementation error in the PEARL-DGS formula was identified and corrected.
  • Formula selection significantly impacts refractive outcomes in eyes with ALs < 22.5 mm and > 28.1 mm.
  • These outlier ALs may represent over 10% of the patient population, highlighting the clinical relevance of formula choice.