4.4 Article

Automated refraction is stable 1week after uncomplicated cataract surgery

Journal

ACTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA
Volume 96, Issue 2, Pages 149-153

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/aos.13545

Keywords

automated refraction; cataract surgery; postoperative; stability; stable; uncomplicated

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PurposeTo compare automated refraction 1week and 1month after uncomplicated cataract surgery. MethodsIn this prospective cohort study, we recruited patients in a 2-month period and included consecutive patients scheduled for bilateral small-incision phacoemulsification cataract surgery. The exclusion criteria were (i) corneal and/or retinal pathology that could lead to automated refraction miscalculation and (ii) surgery complications. Automated refraction was measured 1week and 1month after surgery. ResultsNinety-five patients met the in- and exclusion criteria and completed follow-up. The mean refractive shift in spherical equivalent was -0.02dioptre (D) between 1week and 1month after surgery and not statistical significant (p=0.78, paired t-test). The magnitude of refractive shift in either myopic or hyperopic direction was neither correlated to age, preoperative corneal astigmatism, axial length nor phacoemulsification energy used during surgery (p>0.05 for all variables, regression analysis). The refractive target was missed with 1.0D or more in 11 (12%) patients. In this subgroup, the mean refractive shift in spherical equivalent was 0.49D between 1week and 1month after surgery with a trend towards statistical significance (p=0.07, paired t-test). There was no difference in age, preoperative corneal astigmatism, axial length or phacoemulsification energy used during surgery compared to the remainder of the patients (p>0.05 for all variables, unpaired t-test). ConclusionAutomated refraction is stabile 1week after uncomplicated cataract surgery, but there is a trend towards instability, if the refractive target is missed with 1.0D or more.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available