H. Rodríguez Ortiz , L. Flores Ortiz , R. Devereux García , C. Palacio Pastrana , M. Hilario Pérez , G. Villanueva Pérez , J.M. Piña Valdez , G.Y. Montalvo Domínguez , L.P. Gutierrez Díaz
{"title":"平均角膜度数大于 46 度的患者眼内晶状体功率公式的准确性。","authors":"H. Rodríguez Ortiz , L. Flores Ortiz , R. Devereux García , C. Palacio Pastrana , M. Hilario Pérez , G. Villanueva Pérez , J.M. Piña Valdez , G.Y. Montalvo Domínguez , L.P. Gutierrez Díaz","doi":"10.1016/j.oftale.2024.07.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To compare the accuracy of Kane, Barrett Universal II, Haigis, and SRK-T formulas in eyes with average keratometry greater than 46 diopters (D).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A retrospective analysis was conducted on 101 eyes of 101 patients with average keratometry greater than 46 D. The absolute prediction error (EA) was obtained for each patient one month after surgery. The mean absolute prediction error (MEA), median absolute prediction error (MedEA) and the percentage of patients with absolute refractive error less than 0.25 D, 0.50 D, and 1.00 D were calculated for each formula analyzed.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The Kane formula achieved the lowest MEA (0.53 ± 0.43) and the lowest MedEA (0.41), followed by Barrett Universal II (MEA: 0.56 ± 0.42, MedEA: 0.49), SRK-T (MEA: 0.59 ± 0.44, MedEA: 0.54), and Haigis (MEA: 0.77 ± 0.47, MedEA: 0.69), showing a significant difference in the results. It was also observed that the Kane formula was the most accurate, with the highest percentage of patients, with EA less than 0.25 D, 0.50 D, and 1.00 D (30.7%, 54.4%, and 86.1%, respectively), while the Haigis formula was the least accurate (12.9%, 33.7%, and 69.3%, respectively).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In eyes with corneas having average keratometry greater than 46 D, the Kane formula proves to be a useful tool in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation and demonstrates higher precision compared to the Barrett Universal II, SRK-T, and Haigis formulas.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":93886,"journal":{"name":"Archivos de la Sociedad Espanola de Oftalmologia","volume":"99 10","pages":"Pages 413-419"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of intraocular lens power formulas in patients with average keratometry greater than 46 diopters\",\"authors\":\"H. Rodríguez Ortiz , L. Flores Ortiz , R. Devereux García , C. Palacio Pastrana , M. Hilario Pérez , G. Villanueva Pérez , J.M. Piña Valdez , G.Y. Montalvo Domínguez , L.P. Gutierrez Díaz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.oftale.2024.07.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To compare the accuracy of Kane, Barrett Universal II, Haigis, and SRK-T formulas in eyes with average keratometry greater than 46 diopters (D).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A retrospective analysis was conducted on 101 eyes of 101 patients with average keratometry greater than 46 D. The absolute prediction error (EA) was obtained for each patient one month after surgery. The mean absolute prediction error (MEA), median absolute prediction error (MedEA) and the percentage of patients with absolute refractive error less than 0.25 D, 0.50 D, and 1.00 D were calculated for each formula analyzed.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The Kane formula achieved the lowest MEA (0.53 ± 0.43) and the lowest MedEA (0.41), followed by Barrett Universal II (MEA: 0.56 ± 0.42, MedEA: 0.49), SRK-T (MEA: 0.59 ± 0.44, MedEA: 0.54), and Haigis (MEA: 0.77 ± 0.47, MedEA: 0.69), showing a significant difference in the results. It was also observed that the Kane formula was the most accurate, with the highest percentage of patients, with EA less than 0.25 D, 0.50 D, and 1.00 D (30.7%, 54.4%, and 86.1%, respectively), while the Haigis formula was the least accurate (12.9%, 33.7%, and 69.3%, respectively).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In eyes with corneas having average keratometry greater than 46 D, the Kane formula proves to be a useful tool in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation and demonstrates higher precision compared to the Barrett Universal II, SRK-T, and Haigis formulas.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93886,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archivos de la Sociedad Espanola de Oftalmologia\",\"volume\":\"99 10\",\"pages\":\"Pages 413-419\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archivos de la Sociedad Espanola de Oftalmologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2173579424001361\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archivos de la Sociedad Espanola de Oftalmologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2173579424001361","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Accuracy of intraocular lens power formulas in patients with average keratometry greater than 46 diopters
Objective
To compare the accuracy of Kane, Barrett Universal II, Haigis, and SRK-T formulas in eyes with average keratometry greater than 46 diopters (D).
Methods
A retrospective analysis was conducted on 101 eyes of 101 patients with average keratometry greater than 46 D. The absolute prediction error (EA) was obtained for each patient one month after surgery. The mean absolute prediction error (MEA), median absolute prediction error (MedEA) and the percentage of patients with absolute refractive error less than 0.25 D, 0.50 D, and 1.00 D were calculated for each formula analyzed.
Results
The Kane formula achieved the lowest MEA (0.53 ± 0.43) and the lowest MedEA (0.41), followed by Barrett Universal II (MEA: 0.56 ± 0.42, MedEA: 0.49), SRK-T (MEA: 0.59 ± 0.44, MedEA: 0.54), and Haigis (MEA: 0.77 ± 0.47, MedEA: 0.69), showing a significant difference in the results. It was also observed that the Kane formula was the most accurate, with the highest percentage of patients, with EA less than 0.25 D, 0.50 D, and 1.00 D (30.7%, 54.4%, and 86.1%, respectively), while the Haigis formula was the least accurate (12.9%, 33.7%, and 69.3%, respectively).
Conclusion
In eyes with corneas having average keratometry greater than 46 D, the Kane formula proves to be a useful tool in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation and demonstrates higher precision compared to the Barrett Universal II, SRK-T, and Haigis formulas.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
