Impact of Best Corrected Final Visual Acuity on the Performance of Intraocular Lens Power Calculations.

Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) Pub Date : 2025-05-22 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/OPTH.S520815
H John Shammas, Maya C Shammas, Cooper Bahr, Ramie Sahota, Brad Hall
{"title":"Impact of Best Corrected Final Visual Acuity on the Performance of Intraocular Lens Power Calculations.","authors":"H John Shammas, Maya C Shammas, Cooper Bahr, Ramie Sahota, Brad Hall","doi":"10.2147/OPTH.S520815","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the impact of the best-corrected final visual acuity (BCFVA) on the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations.</p><p><strong>Design setting and methods: </strong>This is a retrospective observational study in a private practice setting, Lynwood, California, USA. We analyzed 1107 eyes undergoing standard monofocal cataract surgery, with IOL power calculated using the Barrett Universal II formula. We evaluated the Mean Prediction Error (MPE) and its standard deviation (SD), the Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and its SD and the percentage of eyes within ±0.50D and ±1.00D in relation to BCFVA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We analyzed 4 groups with BCFVA noted in LogMAR of ≤0.00, 0.02-0.10, 0.12-0.20 and 0.22-0.30. MPE was -0.030±0.321, -0.018±0.353, 0.015±0.369 and 0.070±0.421 D, respectively. MAE was 0.263±0.186, 0.282±0.213, 0.301±0.214 and 0.354±0.236 D, respectively. The percentage of eyes within ±0.50D was 85.9%, 82.6%, 81.5% and 75.5%, respectively. A subgroup analysis of the 1005 eyes with BCFVA of 0.20 LogMAR or better resulted in an MPE of -0.007±0.354 D, a MAE of 0.285±0.209 D and a percentage of eyes within ±0.50D of 82.8%. The difference between this subgroup and the group of eyes with a BCFVA 0.22-0.30 was statistically significant (p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Better IOL power predictions were noted by limiting the study to eyes with BCFVA of 0.20 LogMAR or better.</p>","PeriodicalId":93945,"journal":{"name":"Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)","volume":"19 ","pages":"1693-1697"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12105626/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S520815","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the impact of the best-corrected final visual acuity (BCFVA) on the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations.

Design setting and methods: This is a retrospective observational study in a private practice setting, Lynwood, California, USA. We analyzed 1107 eyes undergoing standard monofocal cataract surgery, with IOL power calculated using the Barrett Universal II formula. We evaluated the Mean Prediction Error (MPE) and its standard deviation (SD), the Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and its SD and the percentage of eyes within ±0.50D and ±1.00D in relation to BCFVA.

Results: We analyzed 4 groups with BCFVA noted in LogMAR of ≤0.00, 0.02-0.10, 0.12-0.20 and 0.22-0.30. MPE was -0.030±0.321, -0.018±0.353, 0.015±0.369 and 0.070±0.421 D, respectively. MAE was 0.263±0.186, 0.282±0.213, 0.301±0.214 and 0.354±0.236 D, respectively. The percentage of eyes within ±0.50D was 85.9%, 82.6%, 81.5% and 75.5%, respectively. A subgroup analysis of the 1005 eyes with BCFVA of 0.20 LogMAR or better resulted in an MPE of -0.007±0.354 D, a MAE of 0.285±0.209 D and a percentage of eyes within ±0.50D of 82.8%. The difference between this subgroup and the group of eyes with a BCFVA 0.22-0.30 was statistically significant (p<0.001).

Conclusion: Better IOL power predictions were noted by limiting the study to eyes with BCFVA of 0.20 LogMAR or better.

最佳最终矫正视力对人工晶状体度数计算性能的影响。
目的:探讨最佳矫正终视敏度(BCFVA)对人工晶状体度数计算精度的影响。设计环境和方法:这是一项回顾性观察性研究,在私人执业环境,林伍德,加利福尼亚,美国。我们分析了1107只接受标准单焦点白内障手术的眼睛,使用Barrett通用II公式计算人工晶状体度数。我们评估了BCFVA的平均预测误差(MPE)及其标准差(SD)、平均绝对误差(MAE)及其标准差以及在±0.50D和±1.00D范围内的眼睛百分比。结果:我们分析了LogMAR≤0.00、0.02-0.10、0.12-0.20和0.22-0.30的4组BCFVA。MPE分别为-0.030±0.321、-0.018±0.353、0.015±0.369、0.070±0.421 D。MAE分别为0.263±0.186、0.282±0.213、0.301±0.214和0.354±0.236 D。±0.50D内眼的比例分别为85.9%、82.6%、81.5%和75.5%。对1005只BCFVA为0.20 LogMAR或更高的眼睛进行亚组分析,MPE为-0.007±0.354 D, MAE为0.285±0.209 D,±0.50D范围内的眼睛比例为82.8%。该亚组与BCFVA为0.22-0.30的眼组之间的差异具有统计学意义(p结论:将研究限制在BCFVA为0.20 LogMAR或更高的眼组,可以更好地预测人工晶状体度数。
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
CiteScore
4.10
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信