期刊
JOURNAL OF CATARACT AND REFRACTIVE SURGERY
卷 48, 期 4, 页码 429-434出版社
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000781
关键词
-
The study evaluated the refractive error after cataract surgery using an optical biometer equipped with anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT). The results showed significant differences between AS-OCT and OCT in various parameters, and AS-OCT exhibited significantly larger refractive prediction error than OCT in all three formulas. This suggests that the two methods could lead to meaningful differences in intraocular lens selection.
Purpose: To evaluate refractive error after cataract surgery using an optical biometer equipped with anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT). Setting: Chukyo Eye Clinic, Nagoya, Japan. Design: Retrospective observational design. Methods: In total, 150 patients with cataract (150 eyes, mean age 73.4 +/- 8.2 years, men 76, women 74), who underwent measurement of parameters with the AS-OCT scanners ANTERION (AS-OCTB) and IOLMaster 700 (OCTB) before cataract surgery, were enrolled in the study. Refractive prediction error was compared between the 2 devices using the SRK/T, Haigis, and Barrett Universal II (UII) formulas for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation. Results: There were significant differences between AS-OCTB and OCTB in axial length, mean corneal refractive power, anterior chamber depth, lens thickness, and corneal diameter (n = 150). In the SRK/T formula, the arithmetic means of refractive prediction errors for AS-OCTB and OCTB were -0.06 +/- 0.46 diopters (D) and 0.02 +/- 0.42 D, respectively. In the Haigis formula, the arithmetic means of refractive prediction errors for AS-OCTB and OCTB were -0.23 +/- 0.40 D and -0.08 +/- 0.35 D, respectively. In the Barrett UII formula, the arithmetic means of refractive prediction errors for AS-OCTB and OCTB were -0.02 +/- 0.38 D and 0.11 +/- 0.36 D, respectively. AS-OCTB showed significantly larger refractive prediction error toward myopia than OCTB in all 3 formulas (P < .0001). Conclusions: The refractive prediction error using AS-OCTB showed a small difference from that using OCTB. While clinically comparable, the 2 methods could drive meaningful differences in IOL selection. Copyright (C) 2021 Published by Wolters Kluwer on behalf of ASCRS and ESCRS.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据