• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

数字生物特征尺-300与眼回波仪-3000的比较:两百例报告

A comparison of the Digital Biometric Ruler-300 and Echo-oculometer-3000: a report of two hundred cases.

作者信息

Sanders D R, Kraff M C

出版信息

J Am Intraocul Implant Soc. 1982 Fall;8(4):365-9. doi: 10.1016/s0146-2776(82)80033-5.

DOI:10.1016/s0146-2776(82)80033-5
PMID:7166523
Abstract

Axial length measurements in 200 patients were performed with the Digital Biometric Ruler (DBR) and the Echo-oculometer with (Echo-osc) and without an oscilloscope (Echo). Measurements taken with the DBR and Echo-osc correlated better with each other than either did with the Echo measurements. In 32% of cases, the DBR and Echo-osc measurements differed by 0.4 mm or more, corresponding to a difference in predicted implant power of 1 diopter (D) or more. In 8% of cases, the measurements differed by 0.8 mm or more, corresponding to a difference in predicted implant power of 2D or more. In spite of these differences in axial length measurement in individual patients, intraocular lens implant power using the SRKTM formula, could be accurately predicted to within 1D of spectacle correction in 75% to 82% of cases, and to within 2D of spectacle correction in 94% to 98% of cases using either the DBR or Echo-osc measurements. Based on the poor correlation of the Echo axial length measurements to the other two, and the poorer implant power prediction accuracy, we do not recommend the use of the Echo-oculometer without an oscilloscope.

摘要

对200名患者进行了眼轴长度测量,分别使用数字生物测量尺(DBR)、带示波器的眼轴测量仪(Echo-osc)和不带示波器的眼轴测量仪(Echo)。与Echo测量值相比,DBR测量值与Echo-osc测量值之间的相关性更好。在32%的病例中,DBR测量值与Echo-osc测量值相差0.4mm或更多,这相当于预测植入物屈光度相差1屈光度(D)或更多。在8%的病例中,测量值相差0.8mm或更多,这相当于预测植入物屈光度相差2D或更多。尽管个体患者的眼轴长度测量存在这些差异,但使用SRKTM公式,根据DBR或Echo-osc测量值,在75%至82%的病例中,人工晶状体植入物屈光度能够被准确预测在眼镜矫正度的1D范围内,在94%至98%的病例中能够被准确预测在眼镜矫正度的2D范围内。基于Echo眼轴长度测量值与其他两者的相关性较差以及植入物屈光度预测准确性较低,我们不建议使用不带示波器的眼轴测量仪。

相似文献

1
A comparison of the Digital Biometric Ruler-300 and Echo-oculometer-3000: a report of two hundred cases.数字生物特征尺-300与眼回波仪-3000的比较:两百例报告
J Am Intraocul Implant Soc. 1982 Fall;8(4):365-9. doi: 10.1016/s0146-2776(82)80033-5.
2
Axial length measurement and its relation to intraocular lens power calculations.眼轴长度测量及其与人工晶状体屈光度计算的关系。
J Am Intraocul Implant Soc. 1982 Fall;8(4):346-9. doi: 10.1016/s0146-2776(82)80027-x.
3
Clinical evaluation of an inexpensive ultrasound oculometer for ocular biometry.一种用于眼生物测量的廉价超声眼轴测量仪的临床评估
Am J Ophthalmol. 1979 Mar;87(3):292-5. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(79)90065-5.
4
Accuracy of intraocular lens powers calculated from A-scan biometry with the Echo-Oculometer.使用超声眼科仪通过A超生物测量法计算人工晶状体屈光度的准确性。
Ophthalmic Surg. 1980 Dec;11(12):856-8.
5
The fudged formula for intraocular lens power calculations.人工晶状体屈光度计算的错误公式。
J Am Intraocul Implant Soc. 1982 Fall;8(4):350-2. doi: 10.1016/s0146-2776(82)80028-1.
6
The accuracy of ultrasonic measurement of the axial length of the eye.
Ophthalmic Surg. 1981 May;12(5):363-5.
7
Intraocular lens power calculation.人工晶状体屈光力计算
Int Ophthalmol Clin. 1979 Winter;19(4):237-52. doi: 10.1097/00004397-197901940-00010.
8
Intraoperative optical refractive biometry for intraocular lens power estimation without axial length and keratometry measurements.用于在不进行眼轴长度和角膜曲率测量的情况下估计人工晶状体屈光力的术中光学屈光生物测量法。
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005 Aug;31(8):1530-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2005.01.035.
9
Biometry and intraocular lens power calculation results with a new optical biometry device: comparison with the gold standard.采用新型光学生物测量仪的生物测量学和人工晶状体屈光度计算结果:与金标准的比较。
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014 Apr;40(4):593-600. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.09.015.
10
Effect of keratometer and axial length measurement errors on primary implant power calculations.
J Cataract Refract Surg. 1990 Jan;16(1):61-70. doi: 10.1016/s0886-3350(13)80876-0.