Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Algorithmic intraocular lens power calculation formula selection by keratometry, anterior chamber depth and axial length.
Kim, Jung Wan; Eom, Youngsub; Yoon, Eun Gyu; Choi, Young; Song, Jong Suk; Jeong, Ji Won; Park, Seh Kwang; Kim, Hyo Myung.
Afiliação
  • Kim JW; BGN Jamsil Lotte Tower Eye Clinic, Seoul, Korea.
  • Eom Y; Department of Ophthalmology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Yoon EG; Department of Ophthalmology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
  • Choi Y; Department of Ophthalmology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Song JS; Department of Ophthalmology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
  • Jeong JW; Department of Ophthalmology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Park SK; Department of Ophthalmology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
  • Kim HM; Department of Ophthalmology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Acta Ophthalmol ; 100(3): e701-e709, 2022 May.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34378871
PURPOSE: To compare the prediction accuracy of algorithmic intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formula selection method using conventional formulas (Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, SRK/T and/or Barrett Universal II) based on keratometry (K), anterior chamber depth (ACD) and axial length (AL). METHODS: A total of 1653 patients (1653 eyes) implanted with Tecnis ZCB00 IOL during cataract surgery were enrolled in this study. Intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas with a small absolute value in the sum of the area under the curve measured by K, ACD and AL subgroup were selected to calculate IOL power in the relevant biometry subgroup. The median absolute error (MedAE) calculated by the Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, SRK/T and Barrett Universal II formulas individually was compared to that calculated by the algorithmic selection method using four formulas, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1 and SRK/T, or five formulas when Barrett is included. RESULTS: The MedAE was 0.27 D in the Haigis, 0.30 D in the Hoffer Q, 0.27 D in the Holladay 1, 0.29 D in the SRK/T and 0.26 D in the Barrett Universal II formulas. The MedAEs determined by the algorithmic selection method using four (019 D) and five (0.21 D) formulas were significantly lower than those by the conventional IOL power calculation formulas. CONCLUSIONS: The IOL power calculation formula selection method by biometry subgroup combined with biometric parameters K, ACD and AL may offer a more superior postoperative refractive error prediction in cataract surgery.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Catarata / Facoemulsificação / Lentes Intraoculares Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Acta Ophthalmol Assunto da revista: OFTALMOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Catarata / Facoemulsificação / Lentes Intraoculares Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Acta Ophthalmol Assunto da revista: OFTALMOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Reino Unido