A comparative analysis of the results of corneal astigmatism correction by toric IOL using various markup methods

Q4 Medicine
I. Ioshin, A. O. Murashev, A. N. Demin
{"title":"A comparative analysis of the results of corneal astigmatism correction by toric IOL using various markup methods","authors":"I. Ioshin, A. O. Murashev, A. N. Demin","doi":"10.21516/2072-0076-2023-16-1-29-35","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: to analyze the results of corneal astigmatism correction by cataract surgery using two methods of marking the calculated toric IOL axis with Alpins vector analysis. Materials and methods. The retrospective study group included 212 patients (259 eyes) with cataracts and baseline corneal astigmatism from 0.75 to 8.25 D. The patients were implanted with two varieties of toric IOLs: Alcon Acrysof Toric (113 patients, 135 eyes) and Zeiss AT Torbi 709M (99 patients, 124 eyes). IOL parameters were calculated using an IOLMaster 500 (Carl Zeiss) optical biometer, the target refraction being emmetropy. The axis of toric IOL alignment was determined by online calculators provided by the producers. The patients were divided into two groups in accordance with the marking method: group 1 patients (149 eyes) were marked using by the authors’ techniques that used the angular scale of the slit lamp, while group 2 (110 eyes) was treated with Verion (Alcon) and Callisto Eye (Zeiss) navigation systems. The effectiveness of astigmatism correction was assessed using the Alpins vector analysis method. Results. After surgery, both groups showed a significant increase in uncorrected (UCVA) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA). In group 1, one month after the operation, the UCVA was 0.67 ± 0.19, and the BCVA was 0.80 ± 0.17. In group 2, UCVA was 0.69 ± 0,07, and BCVA was 0.80 ± 0.49. The success index (IOS) was 0.14 in group 1 and 0.11 in group 2. The difference vector (DV) in the two groups was 0.37 and 0.31 D, respectively, suggesting highly precise astigmatism correction. The average error angle (AOfE) in group 1 was 3.29°, and in group 2 — 3.29°. The average value of the TIA vector was 2.69 ± 1.01 D along the axis of 87.3°, in group 1, while that of group 2 was 2.75 ± 1.09 D along the axis of 95.1°. The average values of the SIA vector were 2.32 ± 0.99 D along the axis of 870 in group 1 and — 2.44 ± 1.03 D along the axis of 99.6° in group 2. Conclusion. The authors’ markup method using the angular scale of the slit lamp yields high functional results of corneal astigmatism correction. The comparative vector analysis of the two study groups shows similar results in applying the authors’ type of markup and that of intraoperative navigation systems.","PeriodicalId":36080,"journal":{"name":"Rossiiskii Oftal''mologicheskii Zhurnal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rossiiskii Oftal''mologicheskii Zhurnal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21516/2072-0076-2023-16-1-29-35","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: to analyze the results of corneal astigmatism correction by cataract surgery using two methods of marking the calculated toric IOL axis with Alpins vector analysis. Materials and methods. The retrospective study group included 212 patients (259 eyes) with cataracts and baseline corneal astigmatism from 0.75 to 8.25 D. The patients were implanted with two varieties of toric IOLs: Alcon Acrysof Toric (113 patients, 135 eyes) and Zeiss AT Torbi 709M (99 patients, 124 eyes). IOL parameters were calculated using an IOLMaster 500 (Carl Zeiss) optical biometer, the target refraction being emmetropy. The axis of toric IOL alignment was determined by online calculators provided by the producers. The patients were divided into two groups in accordance with the marking method: group 1 patients (149 eyes) were marked using by the authors’ techniques that used the angular scale of the slit lamp, while group 2 (110 eyes) was treated with Verion (Alcon) and Callisto Eye (Zeiss) navigation systems. The effectiveness of astigmatism correction was assessed using the Alpins vector analysis method. Results. After surgery, both groups showed a significant increase in uncorrected (UCVA) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA). In group 1, one month after the operation, the UCVA was 0.67 ± 0.19, and the BCVA was 0.80 ± 0.17. In group 2, UCVA was 0.69 ± 0,07, and BCVA was 0.80 ± 0.49. The success index (IOS) was 0.14 in group 1 and 0.11 in group 2. The difference vector (DV) in the two groups was 0.37 and 0.31 D, respectively, suggesting highly precise astigmatism correction. The average error angle (AOfE) in group 1 was 3.29°, and in group 2 — 3.29°. The average value of the TIA vector was 2.69 ± 1.01 D along the axis of 87.3°, in group 1, while that of group 2 was 2.75 ± 1.09 D along the axis of 95.1°. The average values of the SIA vector were 2.32 ± 0.99 D along the axis of 870 in group 1 and — 2.44 ± 1.03 D along the axis of 99.6° in group 2. Conclusion. The authors’ markup method using the angular scale of the slit lamp yields high functional results of corneal astigmatism correction. The comparative vector analysis of the two study groups shows similar results in applying the authors’ type of markup and that of intraoperative navigation systems.
不同标记方法对环形人工晶状体矫正角膜散光效果的比较分析
目的:分析两种方法对计算的环形人工晶体轴进行Alpins矢量分析标记的白内障手术矫正角膜散光的效果。材料和方法。回顾性研究组纳入基线角膜散光为0.75 ~ 8.25 d的白内障患者212例(259眼),植入爱尔康Acrysof toric(113例,135眼)和蔡司AT Torbi 709M(99例,124眼)两种人工晶状体。使用IOLMaster 500(卡尔蔡司)光学生物计计算IOL参数,目标折射为正视。环形人工晶状体的对齐轴由生产商提供的在线计算器确定。根据标记方法将患者分为两组:第一组患者(149只眼)使用作者提出的裂隙灯角度刻度技术进行标记,第二组患者(110只眼)使用Verion (Alcon)和Callisto Eye(蔡司)导航系统进行标记。采用Alpins矢量分析法对像散校正效果进行评价。结果。术后,两组患者未矫正视力(UCVA)和最佳矫正视力(BCVA)均显著增加。组1术后1个月,UCVA为0.67±0.19,BCVA为0.80±0.17。2组UCVA为0.69±0.07,BCVA为0.80±0.49。组1和组2的成功指数(IOS)分别为0.14和0.11。两组的差矢量(DV)分别为0.37 D和0.31 D,表明校正散光精度较高。1组平均误差角(AOfE)为3.29°,2组为- 3.29°。1组TIA载体沿87.3°轴的平均值为2.69±1.01 D, 2组TIA载体沿95.1°轴的平均值为2.75±1.09 D。1组SIA载体沿870°轴的平均值为2.32±0.99 D, 2组SIA载体沿99.6°轴的平均值为- 2.44±1.03 D。结论。作者使用狭缝灯的角度尺度标记方法获得了高功能的角膜散光校正结果。两个研究组的比较向量分析显示,在应用作者的标记类型和术中导航系统时,结果相似。
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
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
107
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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