假性晶状眼客观与主观聚焦深度相关性研究。

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Journal of refractive surgery Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-01 DOI:10.3928/1081597X-20250207-01
Mayank A Nanavaty, Margarita Safir, Muhanned Alwindi
{"title":"假性晶状眼客观与主观聚焦深度相关性研究。","authors":"Mayank A Nanavaty, Margarita Safir, Muhanned Alwindi","doi":"10.3928/1081597X-20250207-01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To develop a method for quantifying objective depth of focus (DOF) from the visual Strehl ratio based on the optical transfer function (VSOTF), measured on a ray-tracing aberrometer (iTrace; Tracey Technologies) and to compare it to the subjective clinical DOF in two groups of pseudophakic eyes with varying asphericity of the intraocular lenses (IOLs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, two groups with negatively aspheric (Eyhance; Johnson & Johnson) and aspherically neutral (RayOne; Rayner) IOLs were assessed 3 to 9 months postoperatively. The patient assessments included: logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity, refraction, defocus curves, and iTrace assessments. The primary outcome was to determine the threshold of VSOTF (%) corresponding to subjective DOF. Secondary outcomes were uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuities, manifest refraction, keratometry, and wavefront aberrometry. The specific threshold of VSOTF matching the subjective DOF was determined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-two eyes (21 patients in each IOL group) were analyzed. For the primary outcome, in the Eyhance versus the RayOne IOL group and all eyes together there was no significant difference between 25% (<i>P</i> = .10 vs .28; <i>P</i> = .07) and 30% (<i>P</i> = .55 vs .73; <i>P</i> = .58) VSOTF and subjective DOF, respectively. For secondary outcomes, UDVA was better in the Eyhance group (<i>P</i> = .02). There was no difference in CDVA, manifest refraction, and keratometry. There was a significant difference in total and internal spherical aberration between the two groups, although it was not clinically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study showed that a 25% to 30% threshold of VSOTF values on iTrace measurements (Nanavaty Threshold) gives an objective DOF estimate, equivalent to clinical DOF derived from the defocus curve irrespective of the IOL's optical profiles. <b>[<i>J Refract Surg</i>. 2025;41(4):e310-e317.]</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":16951,"journal":{"name":"Journal of refractive surgery","volume":"41 4","pages":"e310-e317"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Objective Versus Subjective Depth of Focus Correlation in Pseudophakic Eyes.\",\"authors\":\"Mayank A Nanavaty, Margarita Safir, Muhanned Alwindi\",\"doi\":\"10.3928/1081597X-20250207-01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To develop a method for quantifying objective depth of focus (DOF) from the visual Strehl ratio based on the optical transfer function (VSOTF), measured on a ray-tracing aberrometer (iTrace; Tracey Technologies) and to compare it to the subjective clinical DOF in two groups of pseudophakic eyes with varying asphericity of the intraocular lenses (IOLs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, two groups with negatively aspheric (Eyhance; Johnson & Johnson) and aspherically neutral (RayOne; Rayner) IOLs were assessed 3 to 9 months postoperatively. The patient assessments included: logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity, refraction, defocus curves, and iTrace assessments. The primary outcome was to determine the threshold of VSOTF (%) corresponding to subjective DOF. Secondary outcomes were uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuities, manifest refraction, keratometry, and wavefront aberrometry. The specific threshold of VSOTF matching the subjective DOF was determined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-two eyes (21 patients in each IOL group) were analyzed. For the primary outcome, in the Eyhance versus the RayOne IOL group and all eyes together there was no significant difference between 25% (<i>P</i> = .10 vs .28; <i>P</i> = .07) and 30% (<i>P</i> = .55 vs .73; <i>P</i> = .58) VSOTF and subjective DOF, respectively. For secondary outcomes, UDVA was better in the Eyhance group (<i>P</i> = .02). There was no difference in CDVA, manifest refraction, and keratometry. There was a significant difference in total and internal spherical aberration between the two groups, although it was not clinically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study showed that a 25% to 30% threshold of VSOTF values on iTrace measurements (Nanavaty Threshold) gives an objective DOF estimate, equivalent to clinical DOF derived from the defocus curve irrespective of the IOL's optical profiles. <b>[<i>J Refract Surg</i>. 2025;41(4):e310-e317.]</b>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of refractive surgery\",\"volume\":\"41 4\",\"pages\":\"e310-e317\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"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-20250207-01\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20250207-01","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:建立一种基于光学传递函数(VSOTF)的物镜焦深(DOF)量化方法,该方法由射线追踪像差仪(iTrace;Tracey Technologies),并将其与两组人工晶状体(iol)非圆度不同的假晶状体眼的主观临床DOF进行比较。方法:在横断面研究中,两组负非球面(Eyhance;非球面中性(RayOne;术后3 ~ 9个月评估人工晶状体。患者评估包括:最小分辨角的对数、屈光、离焦曲线和iTrace评估。主要结果是确定与主观自由度相对应的VSOTF阈值(%)。次要结果是未矫正(UDVA)和矫正(CDVA)距离视力、明显屈光、角膜测量和波前像差。确定了VSOTF与主观自由度匹配的具体阈值。结果:分析42只眼(每组21例)。对于主要结果,Eyhance与RayOne人工晶状体组和所有眼睛在25%之间没有显著差异(P = 0.10 vs . 0.28;P = .07)和30% (P = .55 vs .73;P = .58) VSOTF和主观自由度。次要结局方面,Eyhance组UDVA更好(P = .02)。两组的CDVA、明显屈光和角膜测量无差异。两组间总球差和内球差差异有统计学意义,但临床差异无统计学意义。结论:本研究表明,iTrace测量的VSOTF值的25%至30%阈值(Nanavaty阈值)给出了客观的DOF估计,相当于从离焦曲线得出的临床DOF,而不考虑IOL的光学轮廓。[J].中国光学精密工程,2015;41(4):391 - 397。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Objective Versus Subjective Depth of Focus Correlation in Pseudophakic Eyes.

Purpose: To develop a method for quantifying objective depth of focus (DOF) from the visual Strehl ratio based on the optical transfer function (VSOTF), measured on a ray-tracing aberrometer (iTrace; Tracey Technologies) and to compare it to the subjective clinical DOF in two groups of pseudophakic eyes with varying asphericity of the intraocular lenses (IOLs).

Methods: In this cross-sectional study, two groups with negatively aspheric (Eyhance; Johnson & Johnson) and aspherically neutral (RayOne; Rayner) IOLs were assessed 3 to 9 months postoperatively. The patient assessments included: logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity, refraction, defocus curves, and iTrace assessments. The primary outcome was to determine the threshold of VSOTF (%) corresponding to subjective DOF. Secondary outcomes were uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuities, manifest refraction, keratometry, and wavefront aberrometry. The specific threshold of VSOTF matching the subjective DOF was determined.

Results: Forty-two eyes (21 patients in each IOL group) were analyzed. For the primary outcome, in the Eyhance versus the RayOne IOL group and all eyes together there was no significant difference between 25% (P = .10 vs .28; P = .07) and 30% (P = .55 vs .73; P = .58) VSOTF and subjective DOF, respectively. For secondary outcomes, UDVA was better in the Eyhance group (P = .02). There was no difference in CDVA, manifest refraction, and keratometry. There was a significant difference in total and internal spherical aberration between the two groups, although it was not clinically significant.

Conclusions: This study showed that a 25% to 30% threshold of VSOTF values on iTrace measurements (Nanavaty Threshold) gives an objective DOF estimate, equivalent to clinical DOF derived from the defocus curve irrespective of the IOL's optical profiles. [J Refract Surg. 2025;41(4):e310-e317.].

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
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信