Hany Ahmed Helaly, Karim Abdellatif Gaballah, Ahmed Mahmoud Ragab, Tamer Moussa Ibrahim
{"title":"现代长眼人工晶状体度数计算公式中段和生物计量的评价。","authors":"Hany Ahmed Helaly, Karim Abdellatif Gaballah, Ahmed Mahmoud Ragab, Tamer Moussa Ibrahim","doi":"10.2147/OPTH.S511337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the sum of segments (SOS) biometry in modern intraocular lens power (IOL) calculation formulas for long eyes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective case series that included 177 eyes from 177 patients with axial length (AL) ≥ 24.5 mm. Preoperative AL measurements were performed using the ARGOS (Alcon, Inc). This study used 2 formulas: the Barrett Universal II (BUII) and the Barrett true axial length (BTAL). Other formulas were included: Cooke K6, EVO 2.0, and PEARL DGS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Barrett Universal II formula exhibited the most significant myopic mean prediction error at -0.15 ± 0.27 D, with the Cooke K6, PEARL-DGS, and EVO 2.0 formulas following. In terms of hyperopic mean prediction error, the PEARL-DGSsos formula recorded the highest value at 0.19 ± 0.32 D, succeeded by the EVO 2.0sos, Cooke K6sos, and BTAL formulas. The EVO 2.0, PEARL-DGS, Barrett Universal II, and Cooke K6 formulas demonstrated the lowest mean and median absolute errors, with BTAL, EVO 2.0sos, Cooke K6sos, and PEARL-DGSsos formulas trailing behind. The median absolute errors (MedAE) for EVO 2.0, PEARL-DGS, and Barrett Universal II were recorded at 0.13, 0.15, and 0.16 D, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>BUII formula showed myopic shift with SOS biometry which increases with longer eyes. Using SOS option in Cooke K6, EVO 2.0, and PEARL-DGS formulas leads to a hyperopic shift in the mean prediction error which is undesirable. Using ALsos in those formulas without choosing the option of SOS yields a mean prediction error towards the myopic side which might be more desirable. All included formulas performed well with ALsos with most of the cases within + 1 D of intended refraction.</p>","PeriodicalId":93945,"journal":{"name":"Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)","volume":"19 ","pages":"785-793"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11899907/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Sum of Segments Biometry in Modern Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Long Eyes.\",\"authors\":\"Hany Ahmed Helaly, Karim Abdellatif Gaballah, Ahmed Mahmoud Ragab, Tamer Moussa Ibrahim\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/OPTH.S511337\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the sum of segments (SOS) biometry in modern intraocular lens power (IOL) calculation formulas for long eyes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective case series that included 177 eyes from 177 patients with axial length (AL) ≥ 24.5 mm. Preoperative AL measurements were performed using the ARGOS (Alcon, Inc). This study used 2 formulas: the Barrett Universal II (BUII) and the Barrett true axial length (BTAL). Other formulas were included: Cooke K6, EVO 2.0, and PEARL DGS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Barrett Universal II formula exhibited the most significant myopic mean prediction error at -0.15 ± 0.27 D, with the Cooke K6, PEARL-DGS, and EVO 2.0 formulas following. In terms of hyperopic mean prediction error, the PEARL-DGSsos formula recorded the highest value at 0.19 ± 0.32 D, succeeded by the EVO 2.0sos, Cooke K6sos, and BTAL formulas. The EVO 2.0, PEARL-DGS, Barrett Universal II, and Cooke K6 formulas demonstrated the lowest mean and median absolute errors, with BTAL, EVO 2.0sos, Cooke K6sos, and PEARL-DGSsos formulas trailing behind. The median absolute errors (MedAE) for EVO 2.0, PEARL-DGS, and Barrett Universal II were recorded at 0.13, 0.15, and 0.16 D, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>BUII formula showed myopic shift with SOS biometry which increases with longer eyes. Using SOS option in Cooke K6, EVO 2.0, and PEARL-DGS formulas leads to a hyperopic shift in the mean prediction error which is undesirable. Using ALsos in those formulas without choosing the option of SOS yields a mean prediction error towards the myopic side which might be more desirable. All included formulas performed well with ALsos with most of the cases within + 1 D of intended refraction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)\",\"volume\":\"19 \",\"pages\":\"785-793\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11899907/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S511337\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S511337","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}
Evaluation of Sum of Segments Biometry in Modern Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Long Eyes.
Purpose: To evaluate the sum of segments (SOS) biometry in modern intraocular lens power (IOL) calculation formulas for long eyes.
Methods: This was a retrospective case series that included 177 eyes from 177 patients with axial length (AL) ≥ 24.5 mm. Preoperative AL measurements were performed using the ARGOS (Alcon, Inc). This study used 2 formulas: the Barrett Universal II (BUII) and the Barrett true axial length (BTAL). Other formulas were included: Cooke K6, EVO 2.0, and PEARL DGS.
Results: The Barrett Universal II formula exhibited the most significant myopic mean prediction error at -0.15 ± 0.27 D, with the Cooke K6, PEARL-DGS, and EVO 2.0 formulas following. In terms of hyperopic mean prediction error, the PEARL-DGSsos formula recorded the highest value at 0.19 ± 0.32 D, succeeded by the EVO 2.0sos, Cooke K6sos, and BTAL formulas. The EVO 2.0, PEARL-DGS, Barrett Universal II, and Cooke K6 formulas demonstrated the lowest mean and median absolute errors, with BTAL, EVO 2.0sos, Cooke K6sos, and PEARL-DGSsos formulas trailing behind. The median absolute errors (MedAE) for EVO 2.0, PEARL-DGS, and Barrett Universal II were recorded at 0.13, 0.15, and 0.16 D, respectively.
Conclusion: BUII formula showed myopic shift with SOS biometry which increases with longer eyes. Using SOS option in Cooke K6, EVO 2.0, and PEARL-DGS formulas leads to a hyperopic shift in the mean prediction error which is undesirable. Using ALsos in those formulas without choosing the option of SOS yields a mean prediction error towards the myopic side which might be more desirable. All included formulas performed well with ALsos with most of the cases within + 1 D of intended refraction.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
