Purpose: To evaluate the influence of analysis mode selection on prediction accuracy of corneal astigmatism using Pentacam. Methods: Fifty-nine eyes of 59 patients implanted with toric intraocular lenses (IOLs) were included in the retrospective study. Preoperative corneal astigmatism (total refractive power) measured with Pentacam was analyzed based on 2-, 3-, 4-, or 5-mm ring or zone mode either centered on corneal apex or pupil center. Actual corneal astigmatism was calculated based on residual astigmatism on the corneal plane, surgical-induced astigmatism, and effective toric power on the corneal plane. Prediction error, the difference between actual corneal astigmatism and measured astigmatism, was compared among different analysis modes. Influences of local topography on prediction error were also evaluated. Results: Based on the zone mode, prediction error was lower when centered on corneal apex than on pupil center at different diameters, whereas based on the ring mode, this difference was only seen at 2-mm cornea (all P < 0.05). When centered on the corneal apex, the zone mode showed lower prediction error than the ring mode at 4- and 5-mm corneas (both P < 0.001), regardless of asymmetric or symmetric astigmatism. In symmetric bowtie, the zone mode showed lower prediction error than the ring mode at 2-mm cornea of the small bowtie, and 4- and 5-mm corneas of the large bowtie (all P < 0.05). Conclusions: For toric IOL planning, the corneal apex may be a better reference center. At a cornea diameter ≥4 mm, the zone mode is more accurate than the ring mode. Local topography affects prediction accuracy in the symmetric bowtie.

The outcomes of toric intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in correcting asymmetric bowtie corneal astigmatism remain uncertain. The accurate measurement of corneal astigmatism is essential for surgical planning. In this prospective cohort study, patients with asymmetric or symmetric bowtie corneal astigmatism who underwent toric IOL implantation were recruited. Preoperative corneal astigmatism was measured with an IOLMaster and Pentacam (including the simulated keratometry (SimK), total corneal refractive power (TCRP), and wavefront aberration (WFA) modes). At 3 months after surgery, the refractive outcomes and residual astigmatic refractive errors were compared with patients with symmetric bowtie astigmatism. The prediction errors (the differences between the calculated actual corneal astigmatism and the measured corneal astigmatism) were compared among the different measurement modes in the asymmetric group. There were no differences in residual astigmatism between the asymmetric and symmetric groups. However, the mean absolute residual astigmatic refractive error was greater in the asymmetric group than in the symmetric group (0.72 ± 0.42 D vs. 0.53 ± 0.24 D, p = 0.043). In the asymmetric group, the mean absolute prediction errors for the IOLMaster, SimK, TCRP and WFA modes were 0.53 ± 0.40, 0.56 ± 0.47, 0.68 ± 0.52, and 0.43 ± 0.40 D, respectively. The Pentacam WFA mode was the most accurate mode (p < 0.05). The absolute prediction error of the WFA mode was positively correlated with the total corneal irregular astigmatism higher-order aberrations and coma (r = 0.416 and r = 0.473, respectively; both p < 0.05). Our study suggests toric IOL implantation effectively corrected asymmetric bowtie corneal astigmatism. The Pentacam WFA mode may be the most accurate measurement mode, although its accuracy decreased as asymmetry increased.

We investigate the interocular symmetry of fixation, optic disc, and corneal astigmatism in bilateral high myopia, and evaluate the predictive relationships between them.

To identify genetic variants associated with refractive astigmatism in the general population, meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies were performed for: White Europeans aged at least 25 years (20 cohorts, N = 31,968); Asian subjects aged at least 25 years (7 cohorts, N = 9,295); White Europeans aged <25 years (4 cohorts, N = 5,640); and all independent individuals from the above three samples combined with a sample of Chinese subjects aged <25 years (N = 45,931). Participants were classified as cases with refractive astigmatism if the average cylinder power in their two eyes was at least 1.00 diopter and as controls otherwise. Genome-wide association analysis was carried out for each cohort separately using logistic regression. Meta-analysis was conducted using a fixed effects model. In the older European group the most strongly associated marker was downstream of the neurexin-1 (NRXN1) gene (rs1401327, P = 3.92E-8). No other region reached genome-wide significance, and association signals were lower for the younger European group and Asian group. In the meta-analysis of all cohorts, no marker reached genome-wide significance: The most strongly associated regions were, NRXN1 (rs1401327, P = 2.93E-07), TOX (rs7823467, P = 3.47E-07) and LINC00340 (rs12212674, P = 1.49E-06). For 34 markers identified in prior GWAS for spherical equivalent refractive error, the beta coefficients for genotype versus spherical equivalent, and genotype versus refractive astigmatism, were highly correlated (r = -0.59, P = 2.10E-04). This work revealed no consistent or strong genetic signals for refractive astigmatism; however, the TOX gene region previously identified in GWAS for spherical equivalent refractive error was the second most strongly associated region. Analysis of additional markers provided evidence supporting widespread genetic co-susceptibility for spherical and astigmatic refractive errors.