Wei Ling, Meng Jiaqi, Qi Jiao, Lu Yi, Zhu Xiangjia
From the Department of Ophthalmology and Eye Institute, Eye and ENT Hospital of Fudan University; NHC Key Laboratory of Myopia (Fudan University); Key Laboratory of Myopia, Chinese Academy of Medical Science; and Shanghai Key Laboratory of Visual Impairment and Restoration, Shanghai, China.
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2021 Aug 1;47(8):1011-1018. doi: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000562.
To compare the accuracy of the methods for calculation of intraocular lens (IOL) power in eyes with previous myopic laser refractive surgery.
EENT Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Network meta-analysis.
A literature search of MEDLINE and Cochrane Library from January 2000 to July 2019 was conducted for studies that evaluated methods of calculating IOL power in eyes with previous myopic laser refractive surgery. Outcomes measurements were the percentages of prediction error within ±0.50 diopters (D) and ±1.00 D of the target refraction (% ±0.50 D and % ±1.00 D). Traditional and network meta-analysis were conducted.
Nineteen prospective or retrospective clinical studies, including 1217 eyes and 13 calculation methods, were identified. A traditional meta-analysis showed that compared with the widely used Haigis-L method, the Barrett True-K formula, optical coherence tomography (OCT), and Masket methods showed significantly higher % ±0.50 D, whereas no difference was found in the % ±1.00 D. A network meta-analysis revealed that compared with the Haigis-L method, the OCT, Barrett True-K formula, and optiwave refractive analysis (ORA) methods performed better on the % ±0.50 D, whereas the Barrett True-K formula and ORA methods performed better on the % ±1.00 D. Based on the performances of both outcomes, the Barrett True-K formula, OCT, and ORA methods showed highest probability to rank the top 3 among the 13 methods.
The Barrett True-K formula, OCT, and ORA methods seemed to offer greater accuracy than others in calculating the IOL power for postrefractive surgery eyes.
比较在接受过近视激光屈光手术的眼中计算人工晶状体（IOL）度数的方法的准确性。
中国上海复旦大学附属眼耳鼻喉科医院。
网状荟萃分析。
检索2000年1月至2019年7月期间的MEDLINE和Cochrane图书馆，查找评估在接受过近视激光屈光手术的眼中计算IOL度数方法的研究。结果测量指标为预测误差在目标屈光度±0.50屈光度（D）和±1.00 D范围内的百分比（%±0.50 D和%±1.00 D）。进行传统荟萃分析和网状荟萃分析。
确定了19项前瞻性或回顾性临床研究，包括1217只眼和13种计算方法。传统荟萃分析显示，与广泛使用的Haigis-L方法相比，Barrett True-K公式、光学相干断层扫描（OCT）和Masket方法的%±0.50 D显著更高，而%±1.00 D无差异。网状荟萃分析显示，与Haigis-L方法相比，OCT、Barrett True-K公式和光学波前屈光分析（ORA）方法在%±0.50 D方面表现更好，而Barrett True-K公式和ORA方法在%±1.00 D方面表现更好。基于两个结果的表现，Barrett True-K公式、OCT和ORA方法在13种方法中排名前三的概率最高。
在计算屈光手术后眼睛的IOL度数方面，Barrett True-K公式、OCT和ORA方法似乎比其他方法具有更高的准确性。
