比较三种新一代免费的眼内人工晶状体计算公式在所有眼轴长度上的表现。

Comparison of three newer generation freely available intraocular lens power calculation formulae across all axial lengths.

机构信息

Laxmi Eye Institute, Panvel, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

出版信息

Indian J Ophthalmol. 2021 Mar;69(3):580-584. doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_943_20.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of three newer generation formulae (Barrett Universal II, EVO, Hill-RBF 2.0) for calculation of power of two standard IOLs-the Acrysof IQ and Tecnis ZCB00 across all axial lengths.

METHODS

In this retrospective series, 206 eyes of 206 patients, operated for cataract surgery with above two IOLs over the last 6 months, were included in the study. Preoperative biometry measurements were obtained from LenstarLS900. By using recommended lens constants, the mean error for each formula was calculated and compared. Then, the optimized IOL constants were calculated to reduce the mean error to zero. Mean and median absolute errors were calculated for all eyes and separately for short (AL<22.5 mm), medium (22.5-24.5 mm), and long eyes (>24.5 mm). Absolute errors and percentages of eyes within prediction errors of ±0.25 D, ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D were compared.

RESULTS

Prediction error with using recommended lens constants was significantly lower in the Barrett Universal II formula as compared to the other two formulae. However, after optimizing lens constants, there were no significant differences in the absolute errors between the three formulae. The formulae ranked by mean absolute error were as follows: Barrett Universal II (0.304 D), EVO (0.317 D), and Hill-RBF (0.322) D. There were no significant differences between absolute errors in the three formulae in each of the short-, medium-, and long-eye subgroups.

CONCLUSION

With proper lens constant optimization, the Barrett Universal II, EVO, and Hill-RBF 2.0 formulae were equally accurate in predicting IOL power across the entire range of axial lengths.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估三种新一代公式(Barrett Universal II、EVO、Hill-RBF 2.0)在计算两种标准 IOL(Acrysof IQ 和 Tecnis ZCB00)在所有眼轴长度上的功率时的准确性。

方法

在这项回顾性系列研究中,纳入了过去 6 个月因上述两种 IOL 行白内障手术的 206 例(206 只眼)患者。术前生物测量值来自 LenstarLS900 获得。使用推荐的镜片常数,计算每个公式的平均误差并进行比较。然后,计算优化的 IOL 常数以将平均误差降低为零。计算所有眼和短眼(AL<22.5mm)、中眼(22.5-24.5mm)和长眼(>24.5mm)的平均和中位数绝对误差。比较了所有眼的绝对误差和预测误差为±0.25D、±0.50D、±0.75D 和±1.00D 的眼的百分比。

结果

与其他两种公式相比,使用推荐的镜片常数时,Barrett Universal II 公式的预测误差显著降低。然而,在优化镜片常数后,三种公式的绝对误差之间没有显著差异。平均绝对误差排名如下:Barrett Universal II(0.304D)、EVO(0.317D)和 Hill-RBF(0.322D)。在短眼、中眼和长眼亚组中,三种公式的绝对误差之间没有显著差异。

结论

通过适当的镜片常数优化,Barrett Universal II、EVO 和 Hill-RBF 2.0 公式在预测整个眼轴长度范围内的 IOL 功率时同样准确。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1b12/7942088/87354619bdd6/IJO-69-580-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索