Muthappan Valliammai, Paskowitz Daniel, Kazimierczak Ava, Jun Albert S, Ladas John, Kuo Irene C
From the Wilmer Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
From the Wilmer Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015 Apr;41(4):778-84. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.08.034.
To compare refractive outcomes using fellow-eye postoperative anterior chamber depth (ACD) in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations with outcomes obtained without fellow-eye data and to assess postoperative ACD stability.
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Consecutive case series.
The main outcome measures were the optimized median absolute error (MedAE) and ACD at postoperative day 1 and postoperative month 1 measured by optical biometry. A program using the Olsen IOL power formula predicted the postoperative ACD and refractive outcomes and calculated theoretical refractive outcomes of inputting fellow-eye ACD at postoperative day 1 and postoperative month 1. Theoretical results were subtracted from the observed manifest refraction and then optimized. Calculations were repeated for the other eye.
In 102 paired eyes, the MedAE was 0.32 diopter (D) (interquartile range, 25% to 75%; range 0.12 to 0.54 D) for Olsen (without fellow-eye data), 0.33 D (range 0.20 to 0.57 D) using fellow-eye postoperative day 1 ACD, and 0.28 D (range 0.13 to 0.51 D) using fellow-eye postoperative month 1 ACD, with a significant difference between the latter 2 MedAE values (P < .0005). In eyes with an Olsen absolute error greater than 0.50 D, use of either ACD in the fellow eye resulted in a smaller MedAE (P ≤ .01). The ACD shallowed by a mean of 148 μm ± 13 (SD).
Use of the fellow-eye postoperative month 1 ACD predicted refractive outcomes better than postoperative day 1 ACD. In eyes with a larger Olsen absolute error, use of either postoperative ACD from the fellow eye would have yielded better results.
No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
比较在人工晶状体(IOL)屈光度计算中使用对侧眼术后前房深度(ACD)与不使用对侧眼数据所获得的屈光结果,并评估术后ACD的稳定性。
美国马里兰州巴尔的摩市约翰霍普金斯大学。
连续病例系列。
主要观察指标为术后第1天和术后第1个月通过光学生物测量法测量的优化平均绝对误差(MedAE)和ACD。使用奥尔森IOL屈光度公式的程序预测术后ACD和屈光结果,并计算在术后第1天和术后第1个月输入对侧眼ACD时的理论屈光结果。从观察到的明显验光结果中减去理论结果,然后进行优化。对另一只眼重复计算。
在102对眼中,奥尔森公式(不使用对侧眼数据)的MedAE为0.32屈光度(D)(四分位间距,25%至75%;范围为0.12至0.54 D),使用对侧眼术后第1天ACD时为0.33 D(范围为0.20至0.57 D),使用对侧眼术后第1个月ACD时为0.28 D(范围为0.13至0.51 D),后两个MedAE值之间存在显著差异(P <.0005)。在奥尔森绝对误差大于0.50 D的眼中,使用对侧眼中的任何一个ACD均可使MedAE更小(P≤.01)。ACD平均变浅148μm±13(标准差)。
使用对侧眼术后第1个月的ACD预测屈光结果比术后第1天的ACD更好。在奥尔森绝对误差较大的眼中,使用对侧眼的任何一个术后ACD都会产生更好的结果。
没有作者对文中提及的任何材料或方法拥有财务或专利权益。