Accuracy of intraoperative aberrometry versus modern preoperative methods in post-myopic laser vision correction eyes undergoing cataract surgery with capsular tension ring placement

Allison J. Chen, Christopher P. Long, Tianlun Lu, Kevin J. Garff, Christopher W. Heichel
{"title":"Accuracy of intraoperative aberrometry versus modern preoperative methods in post-myopic laser vision correction eyes undergoing cataract surgery with capsular tension ring placement","authors":"Allison J. Chen, Christopher P. Long, Tianlun Lu, Kevin J. Garff, Christopher W. Heichel","doi":"10.1007/s00417-023-06327-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Purpose</h3><p>To assess the accuracy of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry (IWA) versus modern intraocular lens formulas in post-myopic laser vision correction (LVC) patients undergoing cataract surgery with capsular tension ring placement.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>This is a retrospective chart review conducted at an academic outpatient center. All post-myopic LVC eyes undergoing cataract surgery with IWA from a single surgeon from 05/2017 to 12/2019 were included. All patients received a capsular tension ring (CTR). Mean numerical error (MNE), median numerical error (MedNE), and percentages of prediction error within 0.50D, 0.75D, and 1.00D were calculated for the above formulas.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>Twenty-seven post-myopic LVC eyes from 18 patients were included. In post-myopic LVC, MNE with Optiwave Refractive Analysis (ORA), Barrett True K (BTK), Haigis, Haigis-L, Shammas, SRK/T, Hill-RBF v3.0, and W-K AL-adjusted Holladay 1 were + 0.224, − 0.094, + 0.193, − 0.231, − 0.372, + 1.013, + 0.860, and + 0.630 (<i>F</i> = 8.49, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). MedNE were + 0.125, − 0.145, + 0.175, + 0.333, + 0.333, + 1.100, + 0.880, and + 0.765 (<i>F</i> = 7.89, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), respectively. BTK provided improved accuracy in both MNE (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) and MedNE (<i>p</i> = .033) when compared to ORA in pairwise analysis. If the ORA vs. BTK-suggested IOL power were routinely selected, 30% and 15% of eyes would have projected hyperopic outcomes, respectively (<i>p</i> = 0.09).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusions</h3><p>Our study suggests that in post-myopic LVC eyes undergoing cataract surgery with CTRs, BTK performed more accurately than ORA with regard to accuracy and yielded a lower percentage of eyes with hyperopic outcomes. Haigis, Haigis-L, and Shammas yielded similar results to ORA with regard to accuracy and percentage of eyes with hyperopic outcomes. On average, Shammas and Haigis-L suggested IOLs that would yield outcomes more myopic than expected when compared to BTK.</p>\n","PeriodicalId":12748,"journal":{"name":"Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology","volume":"67 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-023-06327-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the accuracy of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry (IWA) versus modern intraocular lens formulas in post-myopic laser vision correction (LVC) patients undergoing cataract surgery with capsular tension ring placement.

Methods

This is a retrospective chart review conducted at an academic outpatient center. All post-myopic LVC eyes undergoing cataract surgery with IWA from a single surgeon from 05/2017 to 12/2019 were included. All patients received a capsular tension ring (CTR). Mean numerical error (MNE), median numerical error (MedNE), and percentages of prediction error within 0.50D, 0.75D, and 1.00D were calculated for the above formulas.

Results

Twenty-seven post-myopic LVC eyes from 18 patients were included. In post-myopic LVC, MNE with Optiwave Refractive Analysis (ORA), Barrett True K (BTK), Haigis, Haigis-L, Shammas, SRK/T, Hill-RBF v3.0, and W-K AL-adjusted Holladay 1 were + 0.224, − 0.094, + 0.193, − 0.231, − 0.372, + 1.013, + 0.860, and + 0.630 (F = 8.49, p < 0.001). MedNE were + 0.125, − 0.145, + 0.175, + 0.333, + 0.333, + 1.100, + 0.880, and + 0.765 (F = 7.89, p < 0.001), respectively. BTK provided improved accuracy in both MNE (p < 0.001) and MedNE (p = .033) when compared to ORA in pairwise analysis. If the ORA vs. BTK-suggested IOL power were routinely selected, 30% and 15% of eyes would have projected hyperopic outcomes, respectively (p = 0.09).

Conclusions

Our study suggests that in post-myopic LVC eyes undergoing cataract surgery with CTRs, BTK performed more accurately than ORA with regard to accuracy and yielded a lower percentage of eyes with hyperopic outcomes. Haigis, Haigis-L, and Shammas yielded similar results to ORA with regard to accuracy and percentage of eyes with hyperopic outcomes. On average, Shammas and Haigis-L suggested IOLs that would yield outcomes more myopic than expected when compared to BTK.

Abstract Image

在接受囊袋拉力环置入白内障手术的近视后激光视力矫正眼中,术中像差法与现代术前方法的准确性对比
目的评估在接受白内障手术并放置囊袋拉力环的近视后激光视力矫正(LVC)患者中,术中波前像差法(IWA)与现代眼内晶状体公式的准确性。方法这是一项在学术门诊中心进行的回顾性病历审查,纳入了自 2017 年 5 月至 2019 年 12 月期间接受白内障手术的所有近视后 LVC 眼睛,手术由一名外科医生进行,并使用了 IWA。所有患者都接受了囊袋拉力环(CTR)。计算了上述公式的平均数值误差(MNE)、中值数值误差(MedNE)以及预测误差在 0.50D、0.75D 和 1.00D 范围内的百分比。在近视后 LVC 患者中,使用 Optiwave 屈光分析(ORA)、Barrett True K(BTK)、Haigis、Haigis-L、Shammas、SRK/T、Hill-RBF v3.0 和 W-K AL 调整的 Holladay 1 的 MNE 分别为 + 0.224, - 0.094, + 0.193, - 0.231, - 0.372, + 1.013, + 0.860, and + 0.630 (F = 8.49, p <0.001)。MedNE 分别为 + 0.125、- 0.145、+ 0.175、+ 0.333、+ 0.333、+ 1.100、+ 0.880 和 + 0.765(F = 7.89,p <0.001)。在配对分析中,与 ORA 相比,BTK 提高了 MNE(p < 0.001)和 MedNE(p = .033)的准确性。结论我们的研究表明,在近视后接受白内障手术(CTR)的 LVC 眼睛中,BTK 在准确性方面比 ORA 更准确,而且产生远视结果的眼睛比例更低。Haigis、Haigis-L 和 Shammas 的准确度和远视眼比例与 ORA 相似。平均而言,与 BTK 相比,Shammas 和 Haigis-L 所建议的人工晶体会产生比预期更多的近视结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信