Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2017
Preliminary validation of an optimized algorithm for intraocular lens power calculation in keratoconus.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Camps Vicente J, Piñero David P, Caravaca Esteban, De Fez Dolores
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the theoretical influence on intraocular lens power (PIOL) calculation of the use of keratometric approach for corneal power (Pc) calculation in keratoconus and to develop and validate an algorithm preliminarily to minimize this influence.
METHODS: Pcwas calculated theoretically with the classical keratometric approach, the Gaussian equation, and the keratometric approach using a variable keratometric index (nkadj) dependent on r1c(Pkadj). Differences in PIOLcalculations (ΔPIOL) using keratometric and Gaussian Pcvalues were evaluated. Preliminary clinical validation of a PIOLalgorithm using Pkadjwas performed in 13 keratoconus eyes.
RESULTS: PIOLunderestimation was present if Pcwas overestimated, and vice versa. Theoretical PIOLoverestimation up to -5.6 D and -6.2 D using Le Grand and Gullstrand eye models was found for a keratometric index of 1.3375. If nkadjwas used, maximal Δ PIOLwas ±1.1 D, with most of the values ≤±0.6 D. Clinically, PIOLunder- and over-estimations ranged from -1.1 to - 0.4 D. No statistically significant differences were found between PIOLobtained with Pkadjand Gaussian equation (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The use of the keratometric Pcfor PIOLcalculations in keratoconus can lead to significant errors that may be minimized using a Pkadjapproach.
METHODS: Pcwas calculated theoretically with the classical keratometric approach, the Gaussian equation, and the keratometric approach using a variable keratometric index (nkadj) dependent on r1c(Pkadj). Differences in PIOLcalculations (ΔPIOL) using keratometric and Gaussian Pcvalues were evaluated. Preliminary clinical validation of a PIOLalgorithm using Pkadjwas performed in 13 keratoconus eyes.
RESULTS: PIOLunderestimation was present if Pcwas overestimated, and vice versa. Theoretical PIOLoverestimation up to -5.6 D and -6.2 D using Le Grand and Gullstrand eye models was found for a keratometric index of 1.3375. If nkadjwas used, maximal Δ PIOLwas ±1.1 D, with most of the values ≤±0.6 D. Clinically, PIOLunder- and over-estimations ranged from -1.1 to - 0.4 D. No statistically significant differences were found between PIOLobtained with Pkadjand Gaussian equation (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The use of the keratometric Pcfor PIOLcalculations in keratoconus can lead to significant errors that may be minimized using a Pkadjapproach.