MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.2147/opth.s578393

Медицинская библиотека · Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026

Refractive Outcomes of Cataract Surgery Using Zeiss Artificial Intelligence Calculator versus Barrett Universal II and Kane.

Cannon Nathan T, Redden Liam, Riaz Kamran M, Scruggs Kathleen, Pantanelli Seth M

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

PURPOSE: To compare the performance of the Zeiss AI IOL Calculator (ZAIC) to that of Barrett Universal II (BUII) and Kane, using standard (K) and total keratometry (TK) as inputs.

PATIENTS AND

METHODS

This was a multicenter retrospective case series which included surgery-naïve eyes undergoing cataract surgery with preoperative optical biometry on the IOLMaster 700, monofocal IOL (Bausch & Lomb enVista MX60E) implantation, and 20/40 acuity or better measured at least 3 weeks postoperatively. After taking the difference between actual and predicted postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) for each eye, optimized outcome measures included the mean absolute error (MAE), standard deviation (SD) of the mean prediction error, root mean squared absolute error (RMSAE), median prediction error (MedAE), and proportion of eyes within 0.5 D of predicted. Statistical differences were identified using Wilcox-Holladay-Wang-Koch tests with Holm correction.

RESULTS

A total of 246 eyes of 246 patients were analyzed. The MAE of ZAIC was significantly lower than that of BU2 TK [0.30 vs 0.32 D (p = 0.04)]. ZAIC had a lower SD and RMSAE than that of BU2 K and BU2 TK [0.38 vs 0.41 (p = 0.001) and 0.42 D (p = 0.002); 0.38 vs 0.41 (p = 0.008) and 0.42 (p = 0.008)]. ZAIC also had a larger proportion of eyes within 0.5 D of predicted compared to BU2 K [82% vs 76% (p = 0.02)], as well as a larger proportion of eyes within 0.75 D of predicted compared to BU2 TK [95% vs 91% (p = 0.02)]. There were no significant differences in MedAE or the proportion of eyes within 0.25 or 1 D of predicted.

CONCLUSION

Compared to BU2, ZAIC produces a lower MAE, SD, and RMSAE, and a higher proportion of eyes within 0.5 and 0.75 D of predicted but performs similarly to Kane across all outcome measures. This remains true regardless of whether K or TK is used as an input. This study is limited by its retrospective design and use of a single MX60E IOL model.

Для цитирования: Cannon Nathan T, Redden Liam, Riaz Kamran M, Scruggs Kathleen, Pantanelli Seth M. Refractive Outcomes of Cataract Surgery Using Zeiss Artificial Intelligence Calculator versus Barrett Universal II and Kane.. Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.). 2026. DOI: 10.2147/opth.s578393.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.