Suppr超能文献

比较新型扫频源光学相干断层扫描和部分相干干涉测量技术的四种不同人工晶状体计算公式的屈光预测。

Refractive prediction of four different intraocular lens calculation formulas compared between new swept source optical coherence tomography and partial coherence interferometry.

机构信息

Kim's Eye Hospital, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2021 May 4;16(5):e0251152. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251152. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the biometry and prediction of postoperative refractive outcomes of four different formulae (Haigis, SRK/T, Holladay1, Barrett Universal II) obtained by swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) biometers and partial coherence interferometry (PCI; IOLMaster ver 5.4).

METHODS

We compared the biometric values of SS-OCT (ANTERION, Heidelberg Engineering Inc., Heidelberg, Germany) and PCI (IOLMaster, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). Predictive errors calculated using four different formulae (Haigis, SRKT, Holladay1, Barrett Universal II) were compared at 1 month after cataract surgery.

RESULTS

The mean preoperative axial length (AL) showed no statistically significant difference between SS-OCT and PCI (SS-OCT: 23.78 ± 0.12 mm and PCI: 23.77 ± 0.12 mm). The mean anterior chamber depth (ACD) was 3.30 ± 0.04 mm for SS-OCT and 3.23 ± 0.04 mm for PCI, which was significantly different between the two techniques. The mean corneal curvature also differed significantly between the two techniques. The difference in mean arithmetic prediction error was significant in the Haigis, SRKT, and Holladay1 formulae. The difference in mean absolute prediction error was significant in all four formulae.

CONCLUSIONS

SS-OCT and PCI demonstrated good agreement on biometric measurements; however, there were significant differences in some biometric values. These differences in some ocular biometrics can cause a difference in refractive error after cataract surgery. New type SS-OCT was not superior to the IOL power prediction calculated by PCI.

摘要

目的

比较四种不同公式(Haigis、SRK/T、Holladay1、Barrett Universal II)通过扫频源光相干断层扫描(SS-OCT)生物测量仪和部分相干干涉仪(PCI;IOLMaster ver 5.4)获得的生物测量值和术后屈光结果的预测。

方法

我们比较了 SS-OCT(Heidelberg Engineering Inc.,Heidelberg,德国的 ANTERION)和 PCI(IOLMaster,Carl Zeiss Meditec,Jena,德国)的生物测量值。比较了白内障手术后 1 个月使用四种不同公式(Haigis、SRKT、Holladay1、Barrett Universal II)计算的预测误差。

结果

平均术前眼轴(AL)在 SS-OCT 和 PCI 之间无统计学显著差异(SS-OCT:23.78±0.12mm 和 PCI:23.77±0.12mm)。SS-OCT 的平均前房深度(ACD)为 3.30±0.04mm,PCI 为 3.23±0.04mm,两种技术之间差异显著。平均角膜曲率也在两种技术之间存在显著差异。Haigis、SRKT 和 Holladay1 公式的平均算术预测误差差异有统计学意义。所有四个公式的平均绝对预测误差差异均有统计学意义。

结论

SS-OCT 和 PCI 在生物测量方面表现出良好的一致性;然而,一些生物测量值存在显著差异。这些眼生物测量值的差异可能导致白内障手术后屈光不正的差异。新型 SS-OCT 并不优于 PCI 计算的 IOL 屈光力预测。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/57b5/8096100/0b4f10159ae0/pone.0251152.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

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验