Preview

Medical and Biological Problems of Life Activity

Advanced search

The «optic disc — macula» distance as an independent predictor of refractive outcomes after phacoemulsification with IOL implantation

https://doi.org/10.58708/2074-2088.2026-1(37)-61-68

Abstract

Modern intraocular lens calculation methods do not always achieve ideal refraction due to the influence of additional anatomical factors. This retrospective cohort study evaluated the effect of the optic disc–macula distance, measured by optical coherence tomography, on refractive outcomes after phacoemulsification with IOL implantation in cataract patients. The distance was measured on OCT images, followed by correlation, regression, and ROC analyses with subsequent validation on a control sample. It was established that the studied anatomical parameter is an independent predictor of refractive error. A threshold value was determined that allows for high-sensitivity prediction of the risk of a clinically significant deviation from the target refraction. The nature of the distance’s influence varies depending on the baseline refraction: in hyperopic eyes with a short axis, a pronounced inverse correlation with residual hyperopia was revealed, whereas in myopia, the effect is mediated by the axial length of the eye. These findings substantiate the feasibility of preoperative measurement of the optic disc–macula distance for personalized IOL calculation, especially in patients with hyperopia, which will minimize the risk of unexpected refractive errors and increase patient’s satisfaction.

About the Authors

S. M. Gridjushko
УЗ "Гомельская областная специализированная клиническая больница"
Belarus


V. L. Krasilnikova
УО «Белорусский государственный медицинский университет»
Belarus


O. N. Dudich
УО «Белорусский государственный медицинский университет»
Belarus


A. M. Prudnik
УО «Белорусский государственный университет информатики и радиоэлектроники»


References

1. Petrov SYu, Kozlova IV, Poleva RP. Cataract: a modern view of conservative treatment approaches. Russian Medical Journal. Clinical Ophthalmology. 2019;19(4):206-210. DOI: 10.32364/2311-7729-2019-19-4-206-210. [In Russian].

2. Kiseleva TN, Oganesyan OG, Romanova LI, et al. Optical biometry of the eye: principle and diagnostic capabilities. Russian Pediatric Ophthalmology. 2017;12(1):35-42. DOI: 10.18821/1993-1859-2017-12-1-35-42. [In Russian].

3. Kulikov AN, Kokareva EV, Kotova NA. Comparison of eye biometry results using different devices. Pacific Medical Journal. 2017;(2):53-55. DOI: 10.17238/PmJ1609-1175.2017.2.53-55. [In Russian].

4. Makovkin EM. Clinical significance of deviation of the visual axis of the eyeball from its anatomical axis. Bulletin of Volgograd State Medical University. 2008;1(25):77-79. [In Russian].

5. Melles RB, Kane JX, Olsen T, Chang WJ. Update on intraocular lens calculation formulas. Ophthalmology. 2019;126(9):1334-1335. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2019.04.011.

6. Tabernero J, Artal P. Impact of foveal location on postoperative refraction after cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2020;46(5):732-736. DOI: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000123.

7. Hirnschall N, Buehren T, Bajramovic F, et al. Prediction of postoperative intraocular lens tilt using swept-source optical coherence tomography. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017;43(6):732-736. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.01.026.

8. Abass A, Vinciguerra R, Lopes BT, et al. Positions of ocular geometrical and visual axes in Brazilian, Chinese and Italian populations. Curr Eye Res. 2018;43(11):1404-1414. DOI: 10.1080/02713683.2018.1500609.

9. Liu Y, Wang L, Yang Z. Association between foveal location and refractive error after cataract surgery in high myopia. Eye (Lond). 2022;36(8):1621-1627. DOI: 10.1038/s41433-021-01789-5.

10. Song JS, Kim DH, Lee JY. Fovea-disc distance as a predictor of postoperative refraction in axial myopia. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2023;37(2):98-105. DOI: 10.3341/kjo.2022.0156.

11. Olsen T. Calculation of intraocular lens power: a review. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2007;85(5):472-485. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0420.2007.00879.x.

12. Lundström M, Pesudovs K. Catquest-9SF patient outcomes questionnaire: nine-item short-form Rasch-scaled revision of the Catquest questionnaire. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35(3):504-513. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.11.038.

13. Hoffer KJ, Haigis W, Olsen T. Update on intraocular lens power calculation study protocols: the better way to design and report clinical trials. Ophthalmology. 2021;128(11):e115-e120. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.07.005.

14. Kane JX, Van Heerden A, Atik A, et al. Intraocular lens power formula accuracy: comparison of 7 formulas. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016;42(10):1490-1500. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.07.021.

15. Krasilnikova VL, Dudich ON, Gridyushko SM, et al. Development of a scale to determine patient satisfaction with surgical outcome and intraocular lens choice depending on refractive target. Vestnik Vitebsk State Med Univ. 2025;24(1):89-100. DOI: 10.22263/2312-4156.2025.1.89. [In Russian].


Review

For citations:


Gridjushko S.M., Krasilnikova V.L., Dudich O.N., Prudnik A.M. The «optic disc — macula» distance as an independent predictor of refractive outcomes after phacoemulsification with IOL implantation. Medical and Biological Problems of Life Activity. 2026;(1):61-68. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.58708/2074-2088.2026-1(37)-61-68

Views: 28

JATS XML


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2074-2088 (Print)