Journal
CLINICAL OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 15, Issue -, Pages 531-539Publisher
DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S287573
Keywords
intraoperative aberrometry; IOL calculations; cataract refractive outcomes
Categories
Funding
- Research to Prevent Blindness, Inc.
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This retrospective study evaluated the time cost and prediction error of intraoperative aberrometry (IA) compared to conventional preoperative calculations. Results showed that for eyes with extremes in axial length, prior myopic corneal refractive surgery, or implanting lenses with certain properties, IA provided a clinically meaningful improvement in outcomes despite added surgical time. Additionally, the study identified strong predictors for eyes that benefited most from IA, such as prior myopic corneal refractive surgery and specific lens implantations.
Purpose: To evaluate the time cost of intraoperative aberrometry (IA), to compare IA prediction error to the prediction error associated with conventional formulas using preoperative calculations (PC) and evaluate when IA provides clinically relevant benefit. Methods: This is a retrospective study of eyes that underwent cataract phacoemulsification surgery with IA at an academic eye center. IA versus PC prediction error were compared amongst various preoperative and intraoperative characteristics. Additionally, a dichotomous variable indicating clinically relevant benefit of IA, where IA absolute prediction error was less than 0.5D and PC absolute prediction error greater than 0.5D, was associated with clinical factors. Results: Five hundred eyes of 341 patients were included in the analysis. The quantitative difference between mean absolute prediction errors for IA versus PC was between 0.0D and 0.03D in most subgroups. For the 11.0% of eyes that had clinically relevant benefit to IA, the multivariable model identified the following strongest predictors: prior myopic corneal refractive surgery (Odds ratio (OR) 3.9, p<0.01 for myopic LASIK/PRK, OR 5.5, p=0.01 for radial keratotomy), toric or multifocal/EDOF lens implantation (OR 2.7, p=0.03 for toric monofocal lenses, OR 3.1, p=0.01 for EDOF/multifocal lenses), and short and long axial lengths (p<0.01). On average, IA implementation added 3.0 minutes to surgery (p<0.01). Conclusion: For greatest likelihood of a clinically meaningful improvement in outcomes despite increased surgical time, surgeons and patients should consider using IA for eyes with extremes in axial length, eyes with prior myopic corneal refractive surgery, or when implanting lenses with toric or extended-depth-of-focus/multifocal properties.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available