Accuracy of PEARL-DGS Formula for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Patients With Previous Myopic Laser Vision Correction.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Piero Zollet, Federico Macario, Marco Trevisi, Paolo Vinciguerra, Riccardo Vinciguerra
{"title":"Accuracy of PEARL-DGS Formula for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Patients With Previous Myopic Laser Vision Correction.","authors":"Piero Zollet, Federico Macario, Marco Trevisi, Paolo Vinciguerra, Riccardo Vinciguerra","doi":"10.3928/1081597X-20250707-02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine the accuracy of a new machine learning-based open-source IOL formula (PEARLS-DGS) in 100 patients who underwent uncomplicated cataract surgery and had a history of laser refractive surgery for myopic defects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The setting for this retrospective study was HUMANITAS Research Hospital, Milan, Italy. Data from 100 patients with a history of photorefractive keratectomy or laser in situ keratomileusis were retrospectively analyzed to assess the accuracy of the formula. The primary outcome measures were absolute refractive prediction error, refractive prediction error, and cumulative distribution of absolute refractive prediction error within multiple thresholds. These parameters were estimated post-hoc using the Shammas, Haigis-L, Barrett True-K without history, ASCRS calculator average, EVO, Hoffer QST, and PEARL-DGS formulas. The cumulative distribution of the absolute refraction prediction error was analyzed and statistically tested.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EVO 2.0 showed the lowest median absolute error (MedAE) of 0.36 diopters (D), followed by Hoffer QST (0.38 D) and PEARL-DGS (0.41 D). The cumulative distribution of the absolute refractive prediction error at ±0.50 D threshold showed the following ranking: Hoffer QST (0.65), PEARL-DGS (0.61), EVO 2.0 (0.60), Barrett-True-K (0.56), Haigis-L, ASCRS (0.52), and Shammas (0.45). A significant difference was recorded between Shammas and Hoffer QST only at this threshold (<i>P</i> < .05). Statistical differences could not be detected otherwise.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The new PEARL-DGS IOL formula demonstrated similar accuracy and comparability in median refractive prediction error to the other current formulas in eyes with a history of myopic laser vision correction. The cumulative distribution of refractive prediction error of the PEARLS-DGS performed well even compared to the Hoffer QST results.</p>","PeriodicalId":16951,"journal":{"name":"Journal of refractive surgery","volume":"41 9","pages":"e936-e942"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20250707-02","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the accuracy of a new machine learning-based open-source IOL formula (PEARLS-DGS) in 100 patients who underwent uncomplicated cataract surgery and had a history of laser refractive surgery for myopic defects.

Methods: The setting for this retrospective study was HUMANITAS Research Hospital, Milan, Italy. Data from 100 patients with a history of photorefractive keratectomy or laser in situ keratomileusis were retrospectively analyzed to assess the accuracy of the formula. The primary outcome measures were absolute refractive prediction error, refractive prediction error, and cumulative distribution of absolute refractive prediction error within multiple thresholds. These parameters were estimated post-hoc using the Shammas, Haigis-L, Barrett True-K without history, ASCRS calculator average, EVO, Hoffer QST, and PEARL-DGS formulas. The cumulative distribution of the absolute refraction prediction error was analyzed and statistically tested.

Results: EVO 2.0 showed the lowest median absolute error (MedAE) of 0.36 diopters (D), followed by Hoffer QST (0.38 D) and PEARL-DGS (0.41 D). The cumulative distribution of the absolute refractive prediction error at ±0.50 D threshold showed the following ranking: Hoffer QST (0.65), PEARL-DGS (0.61), EVO 2.0 (0.60), Barrett-True-K (0.56), Haigis-L, ASCRS (0.52), and Shammas (0.45). A significant difference was recorded between Shammas and Hoffer QST only at this threshold (P < .05). Statistical differences could not be detected otherwise.

Conclusions: The new PEARL-DGS IOL formula demonstrated similar accuracy and comparability in median refractive prediction error to the other current formulas in eyes with a history of myopic laser vision correction. The cumulative distribution of refractive prediction error of the PEARLS-DGS performed well even compared to the Hoffer QST results.

珠光- dgs公式计算近视激光视力矫正患者人工晶状体度数的准确性。
目的:确定一种新的基于机器学习的开源人工晶状体配方(PEARLS-DGS)在100例接受无并发症白内障手术并有近视激光屈光手术史的患者中的准确性。方法:本回顾性研究的背景是意大利米兰的HUMANITAS研究医院。我们回顾性分析了100例光屈光性角膜切除术或激光原位角膜磨砂术患者的数据,以评估该公式的准确性。主要观察指标为绝对屈光预测误差、绝对屈光预测误差和绝对屈光预测误差在多个阈值内的累积分布。事后使用Shammas、Haigis-L、Barrett无病史True-K、ASCRS计算器平均值、EVO、Hoffer QST和PEARL-DGS公式估计这些参数。对绝对折射预测误差的累积分布进行了分析和统计检验。结果:EVO 2.0的中位绝对误差(MedAE)最低,为0.36屈光度(D),其次是Hoffer QST (0.38 D)和PEARL-DGS (0.41 D)。在±0.50 D阈值下,绝对折射预测误差的累积分布顺序为:Hoffer QST(0.65)、PEARL-DGS(0.61)、EVO 2.0(0.60)、Barrett-True-K(0.56)、Haigis-L、ASCRS(0.52)、Shammas(0.45)。Shammas和Hoffer QST仅在该阈值上有显著差异(P < 0.05)。否则无法检测到统计差异。结论:对于有近视激光视力矫正史的患者,新的PEARL-DGS人工晶状体配方在中位屈光预测误差方面与其他现有配方具有相似的准确性和可比性。与Hoffer QST结果相比,PEARLS-DGS的折射预测误差累积分布表现良好。
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
5.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
160
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Refractive Surgery, the official journal of the International Society of Refractive Surgery, a partner of the American Academy of Ophthalmology, has been a monthly peer-reviewed forum for original research, review, and evaluation of refractive and lens-based surgical procedures for more than 30 years. Practical, clinically valuable articles provide readers with the most up-to-date information regarding advances in the field of refractive surgery. Begin to explore the Journal and all of its great benefits such as: • Columns including “Translational Science,” “Surgical Techniques,” and “Biomechanics” • Supplemental videos and materials available for many articles • Access to current articles, as well as several years of archived content • Articles posted online just 2 months after acceptance.
×
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