From the Department of Ophthalmology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Mainz, Germany (Wagner, Preußner); Augen- & Laserklinik Castrop Rauxel GmbH, Castrop-Rauxel, Germany (Hoffmann).
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2024 Feb 1;50(2):110-115. doi: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001320.
To evaluate the interchangeability of different tomography devices used for ray tracing-based intraocular lens (IOL) calculation.
Eye clinic, Castrop-Rauxel, Germany.
Retrospective analysis.
Measurements from 3 Placido-Scheimpflug devices and 3 optical coherence tomography (OCT) devices were compared in 83 and 161 other eyes after cataract surgery, respectively. 2-dimensional matrices of anterior local corneal curvature and local corneal thickness are transferred to the ray-tracing software OKULIX. Calculations are performed with the same IOL in the same position of an eye with the same axial length. Differences in spherical equivalent (SE), astigmatism, and spherical aberration are evaluated. Furthermore, the influence of the size of the matrices (optical zone) on the accuracy is quantified.
For the Placido-Scheimpflug devices, the deviations from the average of three measurements taken for each eye in SE (mean ± SD) were 0.17 ± 0.24 diopters (D), -0.26 ± 0.29 D, and 0.08 ± 0.39 D ( P < .001, analysis of variance [ANOVA]), for the centroids of the astigmatic differences 0.04 D/173 degrees, 0.14 D/93 degrees, and 0.10 D/7 degrees, and for the median of the absolute values of the vector differences 0.31 D, 0.33 D, and 0.29 D. For OCT devices, the corresponding results were 0.01 ± 0.21 D, -0.03 ± 0.21 D, and 0.02 ± 0.20 D ( P = .005, ANOVA); 0.18 D/120 degrees, 0.07 D/70 degrees, and 0.22 D/4 degrees; and 0.26 D, 0.30 D, and 0.33 D. The accuracy of the calculated spherical aberrations allows for an individual selection of the best fitting IOL model in most cases.
The differences are small enough to make the devices interchangeable regarding astigmatism and spherical aberration. Although there are significant differences in SE between Scheimpflug and OCT devices, the differences between OCT devices are also small enough to make them interchangeable, but the differences between Placido-Scheimpflug devices are too large to make these devices interchangeable.
评估不同的基于光线追踪的人工晶状体（IOL）计算的断层扫描设备之间的可互换性。
德国卡斯特罗普-劳克塞尔的眼科诊所。
回顾性分析。
在白内障手术后，分别对 83 只和 161 只其他眼睛的 3 台 Placido-Scheimpflug 设备和 3 台光学相干断层扫描（OCT）设备的测量结果进行了比较。前局部角膜曲率和局部角膜厚度的二维矩阵被转移到光线追踪软件 OKULIX 中。在同一轴向长度的同一眼中，使用相同的 IOL 进行计算。评估球镜等效（SE）、散光和球差的差异。此外，还定量评估了矩阵（光区）大小对准确性的影响。
对于 Placido-Scheimpflug 设备，对于每只眼睛的三次测量平均值的偏差（平均值±标准差）在 SE 中为 0.17±0.24 屈光度（D）、-0.26±0.29 D 和 0.08±0.39 D（P<0.001，方差分析[ANOVA]），对于散光差异的质心为 0.04 D/173 度、0.14 D/93 度和 0.10 D/7 度，对于向量差的中位数绝对值为 0.31 D、0.33 D 和 0.29 D。对于 OCT 设备，相应的结果为 0.01±0.21 D、-0.03±0.21 D 和 0.02±0.20 D（P=0.005，ANOVA）；0.18 D/120 度、0.07 D/70 度和 0.22 D/4 度；和 0.26 D、0.30 D 和 0.33 D。计算出的球差的准确性允许在大多数情况下选择最佳拟合的 IOL 模型。
差异足够小，可以使设备在散光和球差方面具有互换性。尽管 Scheimpflug 和 OCT 设备之间的 SE 存在显著差异，但 OCT 设备之间的差异也足够小，足以使它们具有互换性，但 Placido-Scheimpflug 设备之间的差异太大，无法使这些设备具有互换性。
