Kang Byeong Soo, Han Jeong Mo, Oh Joo Youn, Kim Mee Kum, Wee Won Ryang
Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Laboratory of Ocular Regenerative Medicine and Immunology, Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Korean J Ophthalmol. 2017 Dec;31(6):479-488. doi: 10.3341/kjo.2016.0078. Epub 2017 Jun 29.
To compare the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation using conventional regression formulae or the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) IOL power calculator for previous corneal refractive surgery.
We retrospectively reviewed 96 eyes from 68 patients that had undergone cataract surgery after keratorefractive surgeries. We calculated the formula with two approaches: IOL powers using the ASCRS IOL power calculator and IOL powers using conventional formulae with previous refractive data (Camellin, Jarade, Savini, and clinical history method) or without prior data (0, 2 and, 4 mm total mean power in topography, Wang-Koch-Maloney, Shammas, Seitz, and Maloney). Two conventional IOL formulae (the SRK/T and the Hoffer Q) were calculated with the single K and double K methods. Mean arithmetic refractive error and mean absolute error were calculated at the first postoperative month.
In conventional formulae, the Jarade method or the Seitz method, applied in the Hoffer Q formula with the single K or double K method, have the lowest prediction errors. The least prediction error was found in the Shammas-PL method in the ASCRS group. There was no statistically significant difference between the 10 lowest mean absolute error conventional methods, the Shammas-PL method and the Barrett True-K method calculated with using the ASCRS calculator, without using preoperative data.
The Shammas-PL formula and the Barrett True-K formula, calculated with the ASCRS calculator, without using history, were methods comparable to the 10 most accurate conventional formulae. Other methods using the ASCRS calculator show a myopic tendency.
比较使用传统回归公式或美国白内障与屈光手术学会(ASCRS)人工晶状体(IOL)屈光度计算器对既往角膜屈光手术患者进行IOL屈光度计算的准确性。
我们回顾性分析了68例患者的96只眼,这些患者在角膜屈光手术后接受了白内障手术。我们采用两种方法计算公式:使用ASCRS IOL屈光度计算器计算IOL屈光度,以及使用既往屈光数据(卡梅林、贾拉德、萨维尼和临床病史法)或无既往数据(地形图上总平均屈光度为0、2和4mm,王-科赫-马洛尼、沙马斯、塞茨和马洛尼)的传统公式计算IOL屈光度。使用单K和双K方法计算两个传统IOL公式(SRK/T和霍弗Q)。在术后第一个月计算平均算术屈光误差和平均绝对误差。
在传统公式中,应用于霍弗Q公式的单K或双K方法的贾拉德法或塞茨法预测误差最低。在ASCRS组中,沙马斯-PL法的预测误差最小。在不使用术前数据的情况下,使用ASCRS计算器计算的10个最低平均绝对误差传统方法、沙马斯-PL法和巴雷特True-K法之间无统计学显著差异。
不使用病史,使用ASCRS计算器计算的沙马斯-PL公式和巴雷特True-K公式与10个最准确的传统公式相当。使用ASCRS计算器的其他方法显示有近视倾向。