Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Refractive outcomes following cataract surgery in patients who have had myopic laser vision correction.
Chean, Chung Shen; Aw Yong, Boon Kang; Comely, Samuel; Maleedy, Deena; Kaye, Stephen; Batterbury, Mark; Romano, Vito; Arbabi, Esmaeil; Hu, Victor.
Afiliação
  • Chean CS; St. Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
  • Aw Yong BK; St. Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
  • Comely S; St. Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
  • Maleedy D; St. Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
  • Kaye S; St. Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
  • Batterbury M; St. Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
  • Romano V; St. Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
  • Arbabi E; St. Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
  • Hu V; International Centre for Eye Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
BMJ Open Ophthalmol ; 4(1): e000242, 2019.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31179392
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

Prediction errors are increased among patients presenting for cataract surgery post laser vision correction (LVC) as biometric relationships are altered. We investigated the prediction errors of five formulae among these patients. METHODS AND

ANALYSIS:

The intended refractive error was calculated as a sphero-cylinder and as a spherical equivalent for analysis. For determining the difference between the intended and postoperative refractive error, data were transformed into components of Long's formalism, before changing into sphero-cylinder notation. These differences in refractive errors were compared between the five formulae and to that of a control group using a Kruskal-Wallis test. An F-test was used to compare the variances of the difference distributions.

RESULTS:

22 eyes post LVC and 19 control eyes were included for analysis. Comparing both groups, there were significant differences in the postoperative refractive error (p=0.038). The differences between the intended and postoperative refractive error were greater in post LVC eyes than control eyes (p=0.012), irrespective of the calculation method for the intended refractive error (p<0.01). The mean difference between the intended and postoperative refractive error was relatively small, but its variance was significantly greater among post LVC eyes than control eyes (p<0.01). Among post LVC eyes, there were no significant differences between the mean intended target refraction and between the intended and postoperative refractive error using five biometry formulae (p=0.76).

CONCLUSION:

Biometry calculations were less precise for patients who had LVC than patients without LVC. No particular biometry formula appears to be superior among patients post LVC.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: BMJ Open Ophthalmol Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: BMJ Open Ophthalmol Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article