Abstract: 【Abstract】 Objective To compare the refractive prediction accuracy among five novel IOL calculation formulas (BU Ⅱ, EVO 2.0, Kane, LSF, and RBF 3.0) in phacovitrectomy. Design Prospective non-randomized controlled study. Parcitipants 52 patients (control group) who underwent cataract extraction combined with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation due to simple cataracts, as well as 52 patients (52 eyes) who underwent phacovitrectomy due to cataracts combined with full-thickness macular holes or epiretinal membrane (study group) were inclueded between September 2021 and November 2022. Methods The BU II formula was used to calculate the IOL power for all the patients. We checked and recorded the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of all patients before and 1 month after surgery, and calculated the refractive error (PE), standard deviation, mean absolute error, median absolute error, and percentage of eyes with PE within the range of ±0.25 D, ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D for the five IOL calculation formulas. And compareed the performance of the formulas’ prediction performance. Main Outcome Measures PE value using five IOL calculation formulas. Results In the control group, the PE values of the Kane and EVO formulas were (0.20±0.39) D and (0.19±0.40) D, respectively, presenting hyperopia system errors (ｔ=3.41, P=0.001; ｔ=3.60, P=0.001, respectively). The BU Ⅱ, LSF, and RBF 3.0 formulas had no system errors. In the study group, there was no significant difference of PE compared to 0 in the five formulas. The standard deviation, mean absolute error, median absolute error, and percentage of eyes with PE within ±0.25 D, ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D of all formulas in the study group were inferior to those in the control group. After comparing the predictive performance of formulas, the Kane formula and LSF formula ranked the highest in the control group, while the BU II formula ranked the best in the study group. Conclusion At one month after surgery, the application of Barrett UII, LSF, Kane, EVO 2.0, and RBF 3.0 formulas in the study group did not show hyperopic or myopic drift, but their accuracy was lower than that of the control group, manifested as larger standard deviation, mean absolute error, and median absolute error, as well as a lower proportion of PE in all given ranges compared to the control group. However the Barrett UII formula performed the best predicting accuracy in the study group. (Ophthalmol CHN, 2024, 33: 295-300)

Key words: phacovitrectomy, intraocular lens formulas