{"title":"Accuracy of Predicted Refraction Using Two Swept-Source Optical Coherence Biometers and an Intraoperative Aberrometer.","authors":"Keizo Watanabe","doi":"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001628","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the refractive accuracy of Optiwave Refractive Analysis (ORA) using biometric measurements of ARGOS and OA-2000 in the same patient planned for a monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) insertion.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Single center.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Prospective, observational study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients scheduled for cataract surgery between January 2021 and March 2022 (expected corrected distance visual acuity of ≥0.8 postoperatively at 1-3 months) underwent preoperative ocular measurements using ARGOS and OA-2000 biometers on the same day, which were entered into the intraoperative aberrometer ORA system to assess the refractive accuracy of the IOL implant and postoperative spherical equivalent at 1-3 months. The refractive accuracy was compared between ORA using ARGOS (ORA-AR) and ORA using OA-2000 (ORA-OA). The primary endpoint was the comparison of the mean absolute refractive prediction error (MAE) between the ORA-AR and ORA-OA methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 117 eyes of 81 patients were evaluated (mean ± standard deviation [SD] age, 72.8 ± 7.4 years; male, 65.4%). The criteria for noninferiority were met between the ORA-AR and ORA-OA methods, as the upper boundary of the confidence interval (CI) was lower than the noninferiority margin of 0.10 D for the difference in MAE (-0.03 D; 95% CI: -0.061 to 0.001). MAE was numerically smaller with ORA-AR (0.243 ± 0.215 D) but not significantly different from that with ORA-OA (0.269 ± 0.246 D).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Postoperative MAE obtained using ORA-AR was noninferior to that of ORA-OA. However, the MAE and SD of refractive prediction errors with ORA-AR were numerically lower compared with ORA-OA.</p>","PeriodicalId":15214,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001628","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the refractive accuracy of Optiwave Refractive Analysis (ORA) using biometric measurements of ARGOS and OA-2000 in the same patient planned for a monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) insertion.
Setting: Single center.
Design: Prospective, observational study.
Methods: Patients scheduled for cataract surgery between January 2021 and March 2022 (expected corrected distance visual acuity of ≥0.8 postoperatively at 1-3 months) underwent preoperative ocular measurements using ARGOS and OA-2000 biometers on the same day, which were entered into the intraoperative aberrometer ORA system to assess the refractive accuracy of the IOL implant and postoperative spherical equivalent at 1-3 months. The refractive accuracy was compared between ORA using ARGOS (ORA-AR) and ORA using OA-2000 (ORA-OA). The primary endpoint was the comparison of the mean absolute refractive prediction error (MAE) between the ORA-AR and ORA-OA methods.
Results: A total of 117 eyes of 81 patients were evaluated (mean ± standard deviation [SD] age, 72.8 ± 7.4 years; male, 65.4%). The criteria for noninferiority were met between the ORA-AR and ORA-OA methods, as the upper boundary of the confidence interval (CI) was lower than the noninferiority margin of 0.10 D for the difference in MAE (-0.03 D; 95% CI: -0.061 to 0.001). MAE was numerically smaller with ORA-AR (0.243 ± 0.215 D) but not significantly different from that with ORA-OA (0.269 ± 0.246 D).
Conclusions: Postoperative MAE obtained using ORA-AR was noninferior to that of ORA-OA. However, the MAE and SD of refractive prediction errors with ORA-AR were numerically lower compared with ORA-OA.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery (JCRS), a preeminent peer-reviewed monthly ophthalmology publication, is the official journal of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) and the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS).
JCRS publishes high quality articles on all aspects of anterior segment surgery. In addition to original clinical studies, the journal features a consultation section, practical techniques, important cases, and reviews as well as basic science articles.