Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
[Accuracy comparison of total keratometry and standard keratometry in intraocular lens power calculations for post-corneal refractive surgery cataract patients].
Wang, X C; Su, W J; Ge, J J; Huang, Y S.
Afiliação
  • Wang XC; Eye Institute of Shandong First Medical University, State Key Laboratory Cultivation Base, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Qingdao 266071, China.
  • Su WJ; Eye Institute of Shandong First Medical University, State Key Laboratory Cultivation Base, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Qingdao 266071, China.
  • Ge JJ; Eye Institute of Shandong First Medical University, State Key Laboratory Cultivation Base, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Qingdao 266071, China.
  • Huang YS; Eye Institute of Shandong First Medical University, State Key Laboratory Cultivation Base, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Qingdao 266071, China.
Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi ; 60(8): 689-694, 2024 Aug 11.
Article em Zh | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39085159
ABSTRACT

Objective:

To compare the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations using total keratometry (TK) versus standard keratometry (K) in post-corneal refractive surgery cataract patients.

Methods:

This retrospective case series study included 30 patients (36 eyes) with a history of laser corneal refractive surgery who underwent cataract extraction and IOL implantation at Qingdao Eye Hospital, Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, from September 2022 to December 2023. The cohort comprised 16 males and 14 females, with an average age of (53.6±8.1) years. IOL power was calculated using the K-based Haigis-L and Barrett True-K formulas, as well as the TK-based Haigis and Barrett Universal Ⅱ formulas. Postoperative objective refraction was performed to obtain the actual refractive status of the operated eyes. The refractive prediction error (RPE) was defined as the difference between the actual spherical equivalent and the predicted refraction. The absolute value of the RPE was taken as the refractive absolute error (RAE). Differences in errors calculated by the four formulas were compared.

Results:

TK showed good consistency with K, with TK being on average 0.50 D lower than K. Analysis of variance revealed statistically significant differences in RPE among the four formulas (P<0.001). The RPE for the TK-based Haigis formula was (0.17±0.09) D, and for the Barrett Universal Ⅱ formula, it was (0.21±0.11) D, both significantly better than the K-based Haigis-L formula (-0.61±0.12) D and Barrett True-K formula (-0.57±0.11) D (all P<0.001). The percentage of eyes with postoperative RPE<±1.00 D was higher for the TK-based Haigis (92%, 33 eyes) and Barrett Universal Ⅱ (86%, 31 eyes) formulas compared to the TK-based Barrett True-K (75%, 27 eyes) and Haigis-L formulas (67%, 24 eyes), with statistically significant differences (P<0.05).

Conclusions:

Compared with K, TK improves the accuracy of IOL power calculation in post-corneal refractive surgery patients. Both the TK-based Barrett Universal Ⅱ and Haigis formulas demonstrate high accuracy.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Refração Ocular / Catarata / Extração de Catarata / Córnea / Implante de Lente Intraocular / Lentes Intraoculares Idioma: Zh Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Refração Ocular / Catarata / Extração de Catarata / Córnea / Implante de Lente Intraocular / Lentes Intraoculares Idioma: Zh Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article