Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022
Comparison of Astigmatism Prediction Accuracy for Toric Lens Implantation from Two Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Devices.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Melendez Robert F, Smits Gerard, Nguyen Thao, Ruffaner-Hanson Chaselyn D, Ortiz Danielle, Hall Brad
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the astigmatism prediction accuracy for toric intraocular lens (IOL) implantation between two swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) devices: Argos (Movu, a Santec Company) and the IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec).
METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review of 59 eyes (44 patients) with corneal astigmatism and cataract that underwent cataract surgery or refractive lens exchange surgery with a toric IOL. Biometry was performed on all patients prior to cataract surgery and the Barrett toric IOL calculator was used. Visual acuity was measured postoperatively. Manifest refraction was measured at 1 month and compared to the predicted postoperative residual refraction. Preoperative K measurements between devices were also compared.
RESULTS: Mean cylinder prediction error was -0.17 ± 0.43 for Argos and 0.12 ± 0.56 for IOLMaster 700. The cylinder prediction error 0.5 D or less was not significantly different between the devices, with 83.1% (49 eyes) for Argos and 76.3% (45 eyes) for IOLMaster 700 (p = 0.206). Spherical equivalent prediction error was 0.13 ± 0.39 for Argos and 0.25 ± 0.50 for IOLMaster 700. The mean spherical equivalent prediction error 0.5 D or less was significantly different between the devices, with 79.7% (47 eyes) for Argos and 61.0% (36 eyes) for IOLMaster 700 (p = 0.016).
CONCLUSION: The prediction accuracies were similar between the devices, except for spherical equivalent, where a higher percentage of eyes were 0.5 D or less of the prediction with the Argos compared to the IOLMaster.
METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review of 59 eyes (44 patients) with corneal astigmatism and cataract that underwent cataract surgery or refractive lens exchange surgery with a toric IOL. Biometry was performed on all patients prior to cataract surgery and the Barrett toric IOL calculator was used. Visual acuity was measured postoperatively. Manifest refraction was measured at 1 month and compared to the predicted postoperative residual refraction. Preoperative K measurements between devices were also compared.
RESULTS: Mean cylinder prediction error was -0.17 ± 0.43 for Argos and 0.12 ± 0.56 for IOLMaster 700. The cylinder prediction error 0.5 D or less was not significantly different between the devices, with 83.1% (49 eyes) for Argos and 76.3% (45 eyes) for IOLMaster 700 (p = 0.206). Spherical equivalent prediction error was 0.13 ± 0.39 for Argos and 0.25 ± 0.50 for IOLMaster 700. The mean spherical equivalent prediction error 0.5 D or less was significantly different between the devices, with 79.7% (47 eyes) for Argos and 61.0% (36 eyes) for IOLMaster 700 (p = 0.016).
CONCLUSION: The prediction accuracies were similar between the devices, except for spherical equivalent, where a higher percentage of eyes were 0.5 D or less of the prediction with the Argos compared to the IOLMaster.