Revisiting Javal's rule: a fresh and improved power vector approach according to age.

PURPOSE: The scientific community has established Javal's rule as a model linking refractive (RA) and keratometric (KA) astigmatism since its appearance more than 100 years ago. The aim was to improve the accuracy of this relationship according to subject's age by applying the power vector analysis. Posterior corneal curvature has also been studied. METHODS: The IOLMaster 700 optical biometer was used to measure the corneal thickness and the radius of curvature of the anterior and posterior corneal surfaces. Refractive error was determined by a non-cycloplegic subjective refraction process with trial lenses. Linear regression analyses were applied using J0 and J45 power vector components. An evaluation was carried out according to the subject's age resulting into eight regression relationships for each astigmatic vector component for each relationship. RESULTS: A total of 2254 right eyes from 2254 healthy subjects were evaluated. A trend towards against-the-rule astigmatism (ATR) was found with aging, both for refractive astigmatism (RA) and keratometric astigmatism (KA), with 95.2% of subjects under 20 years old having with-the-rule (WTR) KA, and only 22.8% above 79 years old. The following regression equations were found between RA and KA: [Formula: see text] = 0.73 × [Formula: see text] - 0.18 (R = 0.78) and [Formula: see text] = 0.70 × [Formula: see text] + 0.04 (R = 0.69) and between RA and total corneal astigmatism (TCA): [Formula: see text] = 0.73 × [Formula: see text] + 0.13 (R=0.78) and [Formula: see text] = 0.70 × [Formula: see text] - 0.06 (R = 0.68) for the whole sample, but with sensible differences among age groups, both in the slope and in the intercept. CONCLUSION: Ignoring the age of the subject when using Javal's rule could lead to an error in the final cylinder calculation that would increase in high astigmatisms. Applying this new power vector approach based on subject's age could improve the accuracy of the astigmatism prediction.

Refractive outcomes of toric intra-ocular lens implantation in cases of high posterior corneal astigmatism.

Purpose: To evaluate whether the toric intra-ocular lens (IOL) power calculation based on total corneal astigmatism (TCA) in eyes with high posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA) could result in a systematic over-correction or under-correction after operation. Methods: The present study included a mono-centric retrospective study design. The data were collected from 62 consecutive eyes during uncomplicated cataract surgery by a single surgeon with a measured PCA of 0.50 diopters (D) or higher. Toric IOL calculations were made using TCA measurements. The eyes were grouped as either "with-the-rule" (WTR) or "against-the-rule" (ATR) on the basis of the steep anterior corneal meridian. The post-operative refractive astigmatic prediction error was analyzed 1 month post-operatively using the vector analysis by the Alpins method and double-angle plots method. Results: The correction indexes were 1.14 ± 0.29 in the ATR eyes and 1.25 ± 0.18 for the WTR eyes, indicating a tendency toward over-correction. The mean over-correction was 0.22 ± 0.52D in the ATR group and 0.65 ± 0.60D in the WTR group. The magnitude of error (ME) values were significantly different from the ideal value of zero in both groups (ATR: P = 0.03; WTR: P = 0.00). No significant difference in mean absolute error (MAE) in predicted residual astigmatism was found between ATR and WTR groups (0.61 ± 0.42 D versus 0.64 ± 0.39 D; P = 0.54). The ATR group yielded better results, with 48% <0.50D prediction error in the main analysis. Conclusions: The results suggested that in cases of high PCA, the toric IOL calculation, which was performed using TCA, may cause a potential over-correction in the ATR and WTR eyes. For ATR eyes, over-correction led to slight disruption of post-operative visual quality because of the "with-the-rule" residual astigmatism after operation. Therefore, we suggested using TCA for toric IOL calculation in ATR eyes.

The Impact of Posterior Corneal Astigmatism on Surgically Induced Astigmatism in Cataract Surgery.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the changes in posterior corneal astigmatism after cataract surgery and provide a theoretical basis to accurately evaluate the total corneal astigmatism (TA) to be corrected before toric intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Patients and Methods: Sixty-two patients (89 eyes) who underwent phacoemulsification combined with toric IOL implantation (AcrySof IQ Toric SN6AT2-T9) at Shanxi Eye Hospital between January 2017 and September 2018 were enrolled. Surgically induced astigmatism of the posterior cornea (SIAPA) was analysed using vector analysis during pentacam examination. Results: The vector variances of keratometric astigmatism (KA), TA, and posterior corneal astigmatism (PA) preoperatively and postoperatively in the "with-the-rule (WTR) astigmatism" group and "overall patient" group were statistically significant (P < 0.05). A statistically significant difference was observed between surgically induced KA (SIAKA) and surgically induced astigmatism of the total cornea (SIATA) for all patients, including those with WTR astigmatism. For all patients, SIAKA was less than SIATA by 0.05 ± 0.21 D, and for patients with WTR astigmatism, SIAKA was less than SIATA by 0.09 ± 0.22 D. For patients in the "against-the-rule (ATR) astigmatism" group, there were no statistically significant differences between SIAKA and SIATA, although SIAKA was greater than SIATA by 0.03 ± 0.18 D. When PA ≤0.4 D or KA ≤2.0 D, SIAPA can be ignored. However, when PA >0.4 D or KA >2.0 D, ignoring SIAPA caused by cataract surgery incision will cause SIAKA in patients with WTR astigmatism to underestimate SIATA, while SIAKA in patients with ATR astigmatism will cause an overestimation of SIATA. Conclusion: SIA on the posterior corneal astigmatism may have a significant role on more precise planning of toric IOL implantation, especially in cases with higher preoperative anterior or posterior corneal astigmatism.

[Comparative assessment of the accuracy of toric intraocular lens calculations]. / Sravnitel'naya otsenka tochnosti rascheta toricheskikh intraokulyarnykh linz.

PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of toric intraocular lens (IOL) calculations on three modern toric calculators. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study comprised 35 eyes of 35 patients who underwent phacoemulsification with toric IOL implantation (EnVista Toric). Residual postoperative refractive astigmatism was calculated on three calculators: EnVista Toric Calculator, ASSORT Toric IOL Calculator and the Kane formula. Prediction error for each calculator was determined using vector analysis. RESULTS: The mean absolute deviation of predicted postoperative refractive astigmatism over actual astigmatism in diopters was distributed in the following way: 0.82±0.58, 0.70±0.67 and 0.72±0.76 using EnVista Toric Calculator, ASSORT Toric IOL Calculator and the Kane formula, respectively. Centroid prediction error was 0.08 (EnVista Toric Calculator), 0.06 (ASSORT) and 0.10 (Kane formula). There was a significantly smaller deviation using ASSORT and the Kane formula compared to the online calculator (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Toric calculators ASSORT Toric IOL Calculator and the Kane formula showed higher accuracy of toric IOL calculation than EnVista Toric Calculator.

Corneal back surface power - interpreting keratometer readings and what predictions can tell us.

The classical Javal's rule allows estimation of refractive cylinder from keratometric astigmatism using scaling for vergence transformation, with an additional half dioptre of cylinder against-the-rule. With increasing popularity of toric intraocular lenses it has been shown that keratometric astigmatism does not fully reflect the entire astigmatism of the phakic or pseudophakic eye. Researchers mostly argue that this mismatch is primarily due to astigmatism of the corneal back surface, and some papers propose correction strategies to consider this mismatch with the keratometric values. In this Technical Note we address this issue using a vector analysis and show the consequences of this correction on the front and back surface as well as total astigmatism of the cornea. As examples we focus on the correction strategies proposed by Abulafia and by Savini, frequently used in clinical practice. The main conclusion is that, since corneal tomographers do not systematically show zero total astigmatism in situations where keratometry measures astigmatism against-the-rule of around 3 dioptres, there may be reasons other than the corneal back surface for this mismatch between keratometry and total astigmatism. A number of possible sources of this mismatch are proposed.

Contribution of Posterior Corneal Astigmatism to Total Corneal Astigmatism in a Sample of Egyptian Population.

PURPOSE: To determine the percentage of contribution of the magnitude of posterior corneal astigmatism to total corneal astigmatism using Scheimpflug imaging. METHODS: This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted on 356 eyes of 356 patients, where the total corneal astigmatism was calculated by addition of anterior and posterior corneal astigmatism using vector analysis and then the percentage of posterior to total corneal astigmatism was calculated. RESULTS: The percentage of contribution of posterior to total corneal astigmatism was about 30% in patients with With The Rule astigmatism and about 8% in patients with Against The Rule astigmatism. CONCLUSION: Posterior corneal astigmatism should not be neglected during calculation of total corneal astigmatism as neglecting posterior corneal astigmatism can result in errors during calculation and correction of astigmatism.

Distribution of posterior corneal astigmatism and its effect on the calculation of Toric intraocular lens / 中华实验眼科杂志

Objective To analysis the distribution of posterior corneal astigmatism (PA) and evaluate the influence of keratometric astigmatism (KA) and total corneal astigmatism (TCA) on the calculation of Toric intraocular lens (Toric IOL) in patients with age-related cataract (ARC) and high corneal astigmatism.Methods An observational study design was adopted.Pentacam was used to measure 200 eyes of 181 patients with ARC and KA＞0.75 D in Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University from August 2016 to April 2017.KA,PA,TCA and anterior corneal astigmatism (AA) were recorded.The astigmatism magnitude and axis of PA was studied.The subjects were divided into astigmatism with the rule group,astigmatism against the rule group and oblique astigmatism group according to the axis of AA.The correlations of decomposition values between PA and AA or KA and TCA in each group were analyzed by Pearson linear correlation analysis.The difference of decomposition values between KA and TCA in each group was compared by paired sample t test.The type and axis of Toric IOL were calculated by online formula according to KA and TCA.This study followed the Declaration of Helsinki and written informed consent was obtained from each patient prior to any medical examination.Results The mean astigmatic magnitudes of PA was -0.32 D×93.1°.PA exceeded 0.5 D in 22 eyes (11％).The steepest posterior corneal meridian was vertically aligned in 163 eyes (81.5％).The decomposition value KP(0) and KP (45) of PA were positively correlated with those ofAA (r=0.480,P＜0.001;r=0.251,P＜0.001).The mean astigmatic magnitudes of KA and TCA were 1.44D×89.6° and 1.32 D×89.5° in astigmatism with the rule group,1.39 D×153.4° and 1.71 D×154.4° in astigmatism against the rule group and 1.13 D× 122.0° and 1.24 D× 124.2° in oblique astigmatism group.53 eyes (69.7％) had KA higher than TCA in astigmatism with the rule group.82 eyes (87.3％) had KA lower than TCA in astigmatism against the rule group;20 eyes (66.7％) had KA lower than TCA in oblique astigmatism group.There were significant differences in KP (0) between KA and TCA in different astigmatism groups (all at P＜0.001).The calculated Toric IOL type were inconsistent in 85 eyes(42.5％) and the calculated axis were inconsistent in 176 eye s (88.2％).Conclusions In patients with high corneal astigmatism,the astigmatism type of PA is mostly astigmatism against the rule.Ignoring the PA can lead to deviation of Toric IOL type selection and axis placement in some patients.For patients who cannot measure PA or TCA,the type of Toric IOL should be adjusted appropriately.

Effect of the posterior corneal surface on total corneal astigmatism in patients with age-related cataract.

AIM: To explore the effect of the posterior astigmatism on total corneal astigmatism and evaluate the error caused by substituting the corneal astigmatism of the simulated keratometriy (simulated K) for the total corneal astigmatism in age-related cataract patients. METHODS: A total of 211 eyes with age-related cataract from 164 patients (mean age: 66.8±9.0y, range: 45-83y) were examined using a multi-colored spot reflection topographer, and the total corneal astigmatism was measured. The power vector components J0 and J45 were analyzed. Correlations between the magnitude difference of the simulated K and total cornea astigmatism (magnitude differenceSimK-Tca), anterior J0, and absolute meridian difference (AMD) between the anterior and posterior astigmatisms were calculated. To compare the astigmatism of the simulated K and total cornea both in magnitude and axial orientation, we drew double-angle plots and calculated the vector difference between the two measures using vector analysis. A corrective regression formula was used to adjust the magnitude of the simulated K astigmatism to approach that of the total cornea. RESULTS: The magnitude differenceSimK-Tca was positively correlated with the anterior corneal J0 (Spearman's rho= 0.539; P<0.001) and negatively correlated with the AMDR (Spearman's rho=-0.875, P<0.001). When the anterior J0 value was larger than 1.3 D or smaller than -0.8 D, the errors caused by determining the total corneal astigmatism with the karatometric calculation tended to be greater than 0.25 D. An underestimation by 16% was observed for against the rule (ATR) astigmatism and an overestimation by 9% was observed for with the rule (WTR) astigmatism when ignoring the posterior measurements. CONCLUSION: Posterior corneal astigmatism should be valued for more precise corneal astigmatism management, especially for higher ATR astigmatism of the anterior corneal surface. We suggest a 9% reduction in the magnitude of the simulated K in eyes with WTR astigmatism, and a 16% addition of the magnitude of the simulated K in eyes with ATR astigmatism.

Comparison of Anterior, Posterior, and Total Corneal Astigmatism Measured Using a Single Scheimpflug Camera in Healthy and Keratoconus Eyes.

PURPOSE: To compare the effect of posterior corneal astigmatism on the estimation of total corneal astigmatism using anterior corneal measurements (simulated keratometry [K]) between eyes with keratoconus and healthy eyes. METHODS: Thirty-three eyes of 33 patients with keratoconus of grade I or II and 33 eyes of 33 age- and sex-matched healthy control subjects were enrolled. Anterior, posterior, and total corneal cylinder powers and flat meridians measured by a single Scheimpflug camera were analyzed. The difference in corneal astigmatism between the simulated K and total cornea was evaluated. RESULTS: The mean anterior, posterior, and total corneal cylinder powers of the keratoconus group (4.37 ± 1.73, 0.95 ± 0.39, and 4.36 ± 1.74 cylinder diopters [CD], respectively) were significantly greater than those of the control group (1.10 ± 0.68, 0.39 ± 0.18, and 0.97 ± 0.63 CD, respectively). The cylinder power difference between the simulated K and total cornea was positively correlated with the posterior corneal cylinder power and negatively correlated with the absolute flat meridian difference between the simulated K and total cornea in both groups. The mean magnitude of the vector difference between the astigmatism of the simulated K and total cornea of the keratoconus group (0.67 ± 0.67 CD) was significantly larger than that of the control group (0.28 ± 0.12 CD). CONCLUSIONS: Eyes with keratoconus had greater estimation errors of total corneal astigmatism based on anterior corneal measurement than did healthy eyes. Posterior corneal surface measurement should be more emphasized to determine the total corneal astigmatism in eyes with keratoconus.

Age-related changes in with-the-rule and oblique corneal astigmatism.

PURPOSE: To describe the age-related changes in with-the-rule (WTR) and oblique keratometric astigmatism (KA), posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA) and total corneal astigmatism (TCA). METHODS: We used a Pentacam HR (high-resolution) rotating Scheimpflug camera to determine the KA, PCA and TCA in the right eyes of 710 patients, aged from 20 to 88 years. The age-related changes along the vertical, horizontal and oblique meridians were analyzed with Naeser's polar value method in a cross-sectional study. RESULTS: In the whole group, all meridional astigmatic powers and polar values were stable in the age groups from 20 to 49 years, followed by a 1.0 dioptre (D) against-the-rule (ATR) change in KA and TCA, and a 0.12 D reduction in against-the-rule PCA. A nasal rotation of the steep meridian in KA and TCA was noted in the 70-88 years old. The PCA averaged approximately 0.25 D ATR in all age groups. Females displayed the same early astigmatic stability as in the whole group, while male eyes demonstrated a linear decay from 1.5 D WTR at 20 years to 0.5 D ATR astigmatism for the oldest patients. CONCLUSION: Corneal astigmatism is stable until the age of 50 years; thereafter both keratometric and total corneal astigmatism show a 0.25 D ATR change per 10 years. The average 0.25 D ATR PCA compensates the predominant keratometric WTR astigmatism in the younger patients and increases the TCA in the elderly with keratometric ATR astigmatism. The gender-based differences in age-related astigmatism require further studies.

Distribution of the anterior, posterior, and total corneal astigmatism in healthy eyes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the magnitude and axis orientation of the anterior, posterior, and total corneal astigmatism in normal healthy eyes of an Iranian population. METHODS: In a prospective cross-sectional study, ophthalmic and anterior segment parameters of 153 healthy eyes of 153 subjects were evaluated by Galilei dual Scheimpflug analyzer. The magnitude and axis orientation [with-the-rule (WTR), against-the-rule (ATR), and oblique] of the anterior, posterior, and total corneal astigmatism measurements (ACA, PCA, and TCA) were compared according to the age, sex, and other ophthalmic parameters. RESULTS: The mean ± SD age of the study population was 30 ± 5.9 years. The mean magnitude was 1.09 ± 0.76 diopters (D) for ACA, 0.30 ± 0.13 D for PCA, and 1.08 ± 0.77 D for TCA. Males had a significantly higher magnitude of PCA than females (p = 0.041). Most eyes had a WTR anterior astigmatism and an ATR posterior astigmatism. The WTR astigmatism had a higher mean magnitude compared to the ATR and oblique astigmatism in all the astigmatism groups, with a significant difference in the ACA and TCA groups (p < 0.05). PCA magnitude exceeded 0.50 D in only 7.8% of the subjects. ACA, PCA, and TCA were significantly correlated with each other and also had a significant correlation with the anterior and posterior maximum corneal elevation measurements (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The results of this study although are limited due to the small number of participants and confined to our demographics, provided information regarding a population that was not described before and may be helpful in obtaining optimum results in astigmatism correction in refractive surgery or designing new intraocular lenses.

Agreement between total corneal astigmatism calculated by vector summation and total corneal astigmatism measured by ray tracing using Galilei double Scheimpflug analyzer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the agreement between total corneal astigmatism calculated by vector summation of anterior and posterior corneal astigmatism (TCAVec) and total corneal astigmatism measured by ray tracing (TCARay). METHODS: This study enrolled a total of 204 right eyes of 204 normal subjects. The eyes were measured using a Galilei double Scheimpflug analyzer. The measured parameters included simulated keratometric astigmatism using the keratometric index, anterior corneal astigmatism using the corneal refractive index, posterior corneal astigmatism, and TCARay. TCAVec was derived by vector summation of the astigmatism on the anterior and posterior corneal surfaces. The magnitudes and axes of TCAVec and TCARay were compared. The Pearson correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess the relationship and agreement between TCAVec and TCARay, respectively. RESULTS: The mean TCAVec and TCARay magnitudes were 0.76±0.57D and 1.00±0.78D, respectively (P<0.001). The mean axis orientations were 85.12±30.26° and 89.67±36.76°, respectively (P=0.02). Strong correlations were found between the TCAVec and TCARay magnitudes (r=0.96, P<0.001). Moderate associations were observed between the TCAVec and TCARay axes (r=0.75, P<0.001). Bland-Altman plots produced the 95% limits of agreement for the TCAVec and TCARay magnitudes from -0.33 to 0.82D. The 95% limits of agreement between the TCAVec and TCARay axes was -43.0 to 52.1°. CONCLUSION: The magnitudes and axes of astigmatisms measured by the vector summation and ray tracing methods cannot be used interchangeably. There was a systematic error between the TCAVec and TCARay magnitudes.

Analysis of related factors of the anterior corneal astigmatism axis and total corneal astigmatism axis in cataract patients / 国际眼科杂志(Guoji Yanke Zazhi)

AIM: To investigate the difference between anterior corneal astigmatism axis and total corneal astigmatism axis, and the related factors.?METHODS: The anterior corneal astigmatism axis and total corneal astigmatism axis in 789 patients(1141 eyes) of China Medical University Eye Hospital were detected by Petacam and recorded the corresponding age, value of astigmatism, anterior chamber depth, corneal thickness, refraction of cornea and anylized statistically.?RESULTS:We found age was positively correlated with the difference of the anterior corneal astigmatism axis and total corneal astigmatism axis(r=0. 139, P<0. 001). The value of astigmatism was negatively correlated with the difference of the anterior corneal astigmatism axis and total corneal astigmatism axis(r=-0. 293, P<0. 05). The anterior chamber depth was negatively correlated with the difference of the anterior corneal astigmatism axis and total corneal astigmatism axis ( r=-0. 067, P<0. 05). And the corneal thickness, refraction of cornea was not significantly correlated with the difference of the anterior corneal astigmatism axis and total corneal astigmatism axis.?CONCLUSION: There is significant difference in the anterior corneal astigmatism axis and total corneal astigmatism axis, and is positively correlated with age, and is negatively correlated with value of astigmatism and the depth of anterior chamber.

Comparison of Anterior, Posterior, and Total Corneal Astigmatism Measured Using a Single Scheimpflug Camera in Healthy and Keratoconus Eyes

PURPOSE: To compare the effect of posterior corneal astigmatism on the estimation of total corneal astigmatism using anterior corneal measurements (simulated keratometry [K]) between eyes with keratoconus and healthy eyes. METHODS: Thirty-three eyes of 33 patients with keratoconus of grade I or II and 33 eyes of 33 age- and sex-matched healthy control subjects were enrolled. Anterior, posterior, and total corneal cylinder powers and flat meridians measured by a single Scheimpflug camera were analyzed. The difference in corneal astigmatism between the simulated K and total cornea was evaluated. RESULTS: The mean anterior, posterior, and total corneal cylinder powers of the keratoconus group (4.37 ± 1.73, 0.95 ± 0.39, and 4.36 ± 1.74 cylinder diopters [CD], respectively) were significantly greater than those of the control group (1.10 ± 0.68, 0.39 ± 0.18, and 0.97 ± 0.63 CD, respectively). The cylinder power difference between the simulated K and total cornea was positively correlated with the posterior corneal cylinder power and negatively correlated with the absolute flat meridian difference between the simulated K and total cornea in both groups. The mean magnitude of the vector difference between the astigmatism of the simulated K and total cornea of the keratoconus group (0.67 ± 0.67 CD) was significantly larger than that of the control group (0.28 ± 0.12 CD). CONCLUSIONS: Eyes with keratoconus had greater estimation errors of total corneal astigmatism based on anterior corneal measurement than did healthy eyes. Posterior corneal surface measurement should be more emphasized to determine the total corneal astigmatism in eyes with keratoconus.

The Change in Corneal Astigmatism after Cataract Surgery in Patients with Small Amount of Astigmatism

PURPOSE: To analyze the change in posterior corneal astigmatism and total corneal astigmatism in patients with anterior corneal astigmatism less than 1.0 diopter (D). METHODS: In the present study we evaluated 52 eyes with anterior corneal astigmatism less than 1.0 D. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to steep axis: Group 1 included 33 eyes with within-the-rule (WTR) astigmatism and Group 2 included 19 eyes with against-the-rule (ATR) astigmatism. Anterior, posterior and total corneal astigmatism were measured using Scheimpflug imaging (Pentacam(R)). RESULTS: In Group 1, preoperative anterior astigmatism, posterior astigmatism and total astigmatism were 0.55 +/- 0.44 D, 0.31 +/- 0.14 D and 0.30 +/- 0.72 D, respectively. At postoperative 2 months, anterior astigmatism, posterior astigmatism and total astigmatism were 0.51 +/- 0.67 D, 0.31 +/- 0.15 D and 0.35 +/- 0.81 D, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between preoperative and postoperative anterior, posterior and total corneal astigmatism in Group 1. In Group 2, preoperative anterior astigmatism, posterior astigmatism and total astigmatism were -0.48 +/- 0.46 D, 0.26 +/- 0.09 D and -0.51 +/- 0.65 D, respectively. At postoperative 2 months, anterior astigmatism, posterior astigmatism and total astigmatism were -0.17 +/- 0.68 D, 0.25 +/- 0.13 D and -0.30 +/- 0.55 D, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between preoperative and postoperative anterior, posterior and total corneal astigmatism in the 2 groups. There was no statistical correlation between preoperative posterior corneal astigmatism and postoperative 2 months total corneal astigmatism. After vector analysis, surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) of the anterior and total astigmatism in Group 1 were 0.03 D @ 30degrees and 0.07 D @ 74degrees, respectively, and in Group 2 were 0.27 D @ 100degrees and 0.36 D @ 86degrees, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with preoperative total corneal astigmatism less than 1.0 D, posterior corneal astigmatism had a small effect on postoperative total corneal astigmatism.