Department of Ophthalmology, Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi, India.
Indian J Ophthalmol. 2022 Aug;70(8):2851-2854. doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_3019_21.
To compare the axial length (AL) obtained by A-scan biometry (PAC SCAN 300AP; Sonomed Escalon, USA) and LENSTAR-LS 900 (Haag-Streit, Koeniz, Switzerland) in silicone oil (SiO)-filled eyes.
AL measurements were taken in 50 SiO-filled eyes using A-scan and LENSTAR-LS 900 before SiO removal and 1 month following SiO removal. In the subset of patients requiring intraocular lens (IOL) insertion, the predicted refraction and the refraction obtained were compared. IOL power in these patients was calculated using SRK-T formula and the AL obtained by LENSTAR.
In SiO-filled eyes, a significant difference was noted between the AL values obtained using the two methods (P = 0.0002). No significant difference was noted after SiO removal (P = 0.634). In the subset of patients needing IOL insertion, no significant difference (P = 0.07) was seen between target refractive error and postoperative refractive error (mean deviation from the target being 0.176 diopter). AL of an SiO-filled eye is more accurately measured using optical low coherence reflectometry (OLCR)-based biometry (LENSTAR) than with conventional acoustic biometry (A-scan).
We conclude that LENSTAR gives more accurate biometry in an SiO-filled eye. The AL obtained after SiO removal was comparable and showed no significant difference.
比较硅油(SiO)填充眼的 A 扫描生物测量(PAC SCAN 300AP;Sonomed Escalon,美国)和 LENSTAR-LS 900(Haag-Streit,瑞士)获得的眼轴(AL)长度。
使用 A 扫描和 LENSTAR-LS 900 在 50 只填充 SiO 的眼中测量 AL,在去除 SiO 之前和去除后 1 个月进行测量。在需要植入人工晶状体(IOL)的患者亚组中,比较预测的屈光度和获得的屈光度。这些患者的 IOL 度数使用 SRK-T 公式和 LENSTAR 获得的 AL 进行计算。
在填充 SiO 的眼中,两种方法获得的 AL 值存在显著差异(P = 0.0002)。去除 SiO 后无显著差异(P = 0.634)。在需要植入 IOL 的患者亚组中,目标屈光误差与术后屈光误差之间无显著差异(P = 0.07,平均偏离目标值为 0.176 屈光度)。与传统声学生物测量(A 扫描)相比,基于光学低相干反射测量(OLCR)的生物测量(LENSTAR)更能准确测量填充 SiO 的眼的 AL。
我们得出结论,LENSTAR 可在填充 SiO 的眼中提供更准确的生物测量。去除 SiO 后的 AL 相似,无显著差异。