术中像差测量法与术前生物测量法在眼内透镜功率计算中的对比:美国眼科学会报告。

IF 13.1 1区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Seth M Pantanelli, Kathryn Hatch, Charles C Lin, W Allan Steigleman, Zaina Al-Mohtaseb, Jennifer R Rose-Nussbaumer, Marcony R Santhiago, Tiarnán D L Keenan, Stephen J Kim, Deborah S Jacobs, Julie M Schallhorn
{"title":"术中像差测量法与术前生物测量法在眼内透镜功率计算中的对比:美国眼科学会报告。","authors":"Seth M Pantanelli, Kathryn Hatch, Charles C Lin, W Allan Steigleman, Zaina Al-Mohtaseb, Jennifer R Rose-Nussbaumer, Marcony R Santhiago, Tiarnán D L Keenan, Stephen J Kim, Deborah S Jacobs, Julie M Schallhorn","doi":"10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.08.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the published literature to compare intraoperative aberrometry (IA) with preoperative biometry-based formulas with respect to intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation accuracy for various clinical scenarios.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Literature searches in the PubMed database conducted in August 2022, July 2023, and February 2024 identified 157, 18, and 6 citations, respectively. These were reviewed in abstract form, and 61 articles were selected for full-text review. Of these, 29 met the criteria for inclusion in this assessment. The panel methodologists assigned a level of evidence rating to each of the articles; 4 were rated level I, 19 were rated level II, and 6 were rated level III.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intraoperative aberrometry performed better than traditional vergence formulas, including the Haigis, HofferQ, Holladay, and SRK/T, and similarly to the Barrett Universal II and Hill-RBF with respect to minimization of spherical equivalent (SE) refractive error. For toric IOLs, IA outperformed formulas that only considered anterior corneal astigmatism and was similar to formulas like the Barrett Toric Calculator (BTC), which empirically account for the contribution from the posterior cornea. In eyes with a history of corneal refractive surgery, IA performed similarly to the Barrett True-K and slightly better than other tested methods, including the Haigis-L, Shammas, and Wang-Koch-Maloney formulas.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Intraoperative aberrometry corresponds well with modern vergence formulas, including the Barrett Universal II, Hill-RBF, BTC, and Barrett True-K. It has greater accuracy than traditional vergence-based IOL power calculation formulas in eyes with and without a history of corneal refractive surgery.</p><p><strong>Financial disclosure(s): </strong>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.</p>","PeriodicalId":19533,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intraoperative Aberrometry versus Preoperative Biometry for Intraocular Lens Power Calculations: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.\",\"authors\":\"Seth M Pantanelli, Kathryn Hatch, Charles C Lin, W Allan Steigleman, Zaina Al-Mohtaseb, Jennifer R Rose-Nussbaumer, Marcony R Santhiago, Tiarnán D L Keenan, Stephen J Kim, Deborah S Jacobs, Julie M Schallhorn\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.08.007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the published literature to compare intraoperative aberrometry (IA) with preoperative biometry-based formulas with respect to intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation accuracy for various clinical scenarios.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Literature searches in the PubMed database conducted in August 2022, July 2023, and February 2024 identified 157, 18, and 6 citations, respectively. These were reviewed in abstract form, and 61 articles were selected for full-text review. Of these, 29 met the criteria for inclusion in this assessment. The panel methodologists assigned a level of evidence rating to each of the articles; 4 were rated level I, 19 were rated level II, and 6 were rated level III.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intraoperative aberrometry performed better than traditional vergence formulas, including the Haigis, HofferQ, Holladay, and SRK/T, and similarly to the Barrett Universal II and Hill-RBF with respect to minimization of spherical equivalent (SE) refractive error. For toric IOLs, IA outperformed formulas that only considered anterior corneal astigmatism and was similar to formulas like the Barrett Toric Calculator (BTC), which empirically account for the contribution from the posterior cornea. In eyes with a history of corneal refractive surgery, IA performed similarly to the Barrett True-K and slightly better than other tested methods, including the Haigis-L, Shammas, and Wang-Koch-Maloney formulas.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Intraoperative aberrometry corresponds well with modern vergence formulas, including the Barrett Universal II, Hill-RBF, BTC, and Barrett True-K. It has greater accuracy than traditional vergence-based IOL power calculation formulas in eyes with and without a history of corneal refractive surgery.</p><p><strong>Financial disclosure(s): </strong>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19533,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.08.007\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2024.08.007","RegionNum":1,"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

摘要

目的:评估已发表的文献,比较术中像差法(IA)与基于术前生物测量的公式在各种临床情况下眼球内晶状体(IOL)功率计算的准确性:方法:分别于 2022 年 8 月、2023 年 7 月和 2024 年 2 月在 PubMed 数据库中进行了文献检索,发现了 157、18 和 6 篇引文。对这些文献进行了摘要审查,并选择了 61 篇文章进行全文审查。其中 29 篇符合纳入本评估的标准。小组方法论专家对每篇文章进行了证据等级评定:4 篇文章被评为 I 级,19 篇文章被评为 II 级,6 篇文章被评为 III 级:结果:术中像差测量法在最小化球面等效(SE)屈光不正方面的表现优于传统的辐辏公式,包括Haigis、HofferQ、Holladay和SRK/T,与Barrett Universal II和Hill-RBF相似。对于散光人工晶体,IA 的性能优于只考虑前角膜散光的公式,与巴雷特散光计算器(BTC)等公式相似,后者根据经验考虑了后角膜的贡献。在有角膜屈光手术史的眼睛中,IA的表现与Barrett True-K相似,略优于其他测试方法,包括Haigis-L、Shammas和Wang-Koch-Maloney公式:结论:术中像差测量法与现代辐辏公式(包括 Barrett Universal II、Hill-RBF、BTC 和 Barrett True-K)非常吻合。在有角膜屈光手术史和没有角膜屈光手术史的眼睛中,它比传统的基于辐辏的人工晶体功率计算公式更准确:专利或商业信息披露请参见参考文献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Intraoperative Aberrometry versus Preoperative Biometry for Intraocular Lens Power Calculations: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

Purpose: To evaluate the published literature to compare intraoperative aberrometry (IA) with preoperative biometry-based formulas with respect to intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation accuracy for various clinical scenarios.

Methods: Literature searches in the PubMed database conducted in August 2022, July 2023, and February 2024 identified 157, 18, and 6 citations, respectively. These were reviewed in abstract form, and 61 articles were selected for full-text review. Of these, 29 met the criteria for inclusion in this assessment. The panel methodologists assigned a level of evidence rating to each of the articles; 4 were rated level I, 19 were rated level II, and 6 were rated level III.

Results: Intraoperative aberrometry performed better than traditional vergence formulas, including the Haigis, HofferQ, Holladay, and SRK/T, and similarly to the Barrett Universal II and Hill-RBF with respect to minimization of spherical equivalent (SE) refractive error. For toric IOLs, IA outperformed formulas that only considered anterior corneal astigmatism and was similar to formulas like the Barrett Toric Calculator (BTC), which empirically account for the contribution from the posterior cornea. In eyes with a history of corneal refractive surgery, IA performed similarly to the Barrett True-K and slightly better than other tested methods, including the Haigis-L, Shammas, and Wang-Koch-Maloney formulas.

Conclusions: Intraoperative aberrometry corresponds well with modern vergence formulas, including the Barrett Universal II, Hill-RBF, BTC, and Barrett True-K. It has greater accuracy than traditional vergence-based IOL power calculation formulas in eyes with and without a history of corneal refractive surgery.

Financial disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ophthalmology
Ophthalmology 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
22.30
自引率
3.60%
发文量
412
审稿时长
18 days
期刊介绍: The journal Ophthalmology, from the American Academy of Ophthalmology, contributes to society by publishing research in clinical and basic science related to vision.It upholds excellence through unbiased peer-review, fostering innovation, promoting discovery, and encouraging lifelong learning.
×
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