Tran Elaine M, Tang Kevin S, Chen Allison J, Chen Michael L, Rivera David R, Rivera Jorge J, Greenberg Paul B
and are Medical Students; and are Clinical Assistant Professors of Surgery (Ophthalmology); and is a Professor of Surgery (Ophthalmology); all at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island. is an Ophthalmology Resident at the Shiley Eye Institute, University of California San Diego Health in La Jolla. is a Student at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts. David Rivera and Jorge Rivera are Staff Ophthalmologists, and Paul Greenberg is Chief of Ophthalmology; all at the Providence Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Rhode Island.
Fed Pract. 2020 Mar;37(3):138-142.
Refractive outcomes for cataract surgery with toric intraocular lenses (IOLs) are not well described in a teaching hospital setting. This study investigated the refractive outcomes of cataract surgery with toric IOLs at an academic-affiliated Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) and compared the accuracy of 2 biometric formulae for toric IOL power calculation.
A retrospective chart review of patients who received cataract surgery with toric IOLs from November 2013 to May 2018 was conducted. The Holladay 2 and Barrett toric IOL formulae were used to predict the postoperative refraction for each cataract surgery. The main outcome measures were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and the difference in cylinder between the preoperative and postoperative manifest refractions. The accuracy of each biometric formula was also assessed using 2-tailed tests of the mean absolute error, and subgroup analyses were conducted for short, medium, and long eyes.
Of 325 charts reviewed, 283 patients met the inclusion criteria; 87% (248/283) of these surgeries were performed by resident surgeons. The median postoperative BCVA was 20/20, and 92% of patients had a postoperative BCVA of 20/25 or better. There was no statistically significant difference in mean absolute error between the 2 formulae for the entire axial length range ( = .21), as well as the short ( = .94), medium ( = .49), and long axial length ( = .08) groups.
To our knowledge, this is the largest study that compared the performance of the Barrett toric and Holladay 2 formulae and the first that made the comparison in a teaching hospital setting. This study suggests that the 2 formulae have similar refractive outcomes across all axial lengths.
在教学医院环境中,使用散光人工晶状体(IOL)进行白内障手术的屈光结果尚无详尽描述。本研究调查了在一家学术附属退伍军人事务医疗中心(VAMC)使用散光IOL进行白内障手术的屈光结果,并比较了两种用于计算散光IOL度数的生物测量公式的准确性。
对2013年11月至2018年5月接受散光IOL白内障手术的患者进行回顾性病历审查。使用Holladay 2和Barrett散光IOL公式预测每次白内障手术的术后屈光情况。主要观察指标为最佳矫正视力(BCVA)以及术前和术后明显验光的柱镜度数差异。还使用平均绝对误差的双尾检验评估每个生物测量公式的准确性,并对短眼、中等眼和长眼进行亚组分析。
在审查的325份病历中,283例患者符合纳入标准;其中87%(248/283)的手术由住院医师进行。术后BCVA中位数为20/20,92%的患者术后BCVA为20/25或更好。在整个眼轴长度范围内,以及短眼(P = 0.94)、中等眼(P = 0.49)和长眼轴(P = 0.08)组中,两种公式的平均绝对误差无统计学显著差异。
据我们所知,这是比较Barrett散光公式和Holladay 2公式性能的最大规模研究,也是首次在教学医院环境中进行此类比较。本研究表明,这两种公式在所有眼轴长度上的屈光结果相似。