Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2016
Influence factors of estimation errors for total corneal astigmatism using keratometric astigmatism in patients before cataract surgery.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Zheng Tianyu, Chen Zhanghua, Lu Yi
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence factors of the estimation errors for total corneal astigmatism using keratometric astigmatism in patients preparing for cataract surgery.
SETTING: EYE and ENT Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
DESIGN: Prospective observational study.
METHODS: Eyes of patients preparing for cataract surgery were measured with Pentacam Scheimpflug imaging device. Keratometric astigmatism was obtained using the anterior corneal surface measurement and the keratometric index (1.3375) while neglecting the posterior corneal surface measurement. The Scheimpflug-measured total corneal astigmatism was derived by vector analysis of the astigmatism on both corneal surfaces.
RESULTS: The study comprised 374 eyes of 374 patients 45 to 84 years old. The mean absolute error in magnitude and mean absolute error in angle comparing keratometric astigmatism with Scheimpflug-derived astigmatism was 0.18 ± 0.14 diopter (D) and 7.7 ± 11.0 degrees, respectively. The mean magnitude of the error vector was 0.24 ± 0.14 D. The error in magnitude was significantly larger in eyes with against-the-rule anterior astigmatism, while error in angle was larger in eyes with with-the-rule and oblique anterior astigmatism. Multiple regressions showed that 4 predictors (difference in anterior-posterior astigmatism axis, magnitude of posterior astigmatism, magnitude of keratometric astigmatism, and axial length [AL]) were significantly associated with the absolute error in magnitude. Predictors including the difference in the anterior-posterior astigmatism axis, magnitude of posterior astigmatism, magnitude of keratometric astigmatism, and age were significantly associated with the absolute error in angle and magnitude of the error vector.
CONCLUSIONS: Neglecting posterior corneal astigmatism yielded significant estimation errors in total corneal astigmatism in patients preparing for cataract surgery. Estimation errors were significantly influenced by the difference in the anterior -posterior astigmatism axis, magnitude of posterior astigmatism, keratometric astigmatism, AL, and age.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: None of the authors has any conflicts of interest to disclose.
SETTING: EYE and ENT Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
DESIGN: Prospective observational study.
METHODS: Eyes of patients preparing for cataract surgery were measured with Pentacam Scheimpflug imaging device. Keratometric astigmatism was obtained using the anterior corneal surface measurement and the keratometric index (1.3375) while neglecting the posterior corneal surface measurement. The Scheimpflug-measured total corneal astigmatism was derived by vector analysis of the astigmatism on both corneal surfaces.
RESULTS: The study comprised 374 eyes of 374 patients 45 to 84 years old. The mean absolute error in magnitude and mean absolute error in angle comparing keratometric astigmatism with Scheimpflug-derived astigmatism was 0.18 ± 0.14 diopter (D) and 7.7 ± 11.0 degrees, respectively. The mean magnitude of the error vector was 0.24 ± 0.14 D. The error in magnitude was significantly larger in eyes with against-the-rule anterior astigmatism, while error in angle was larger in eyes with with-the-rule and oblique anterior astigmatism. Multiple regressions showed that 4 predictors (difference in anterior-posterior astigmatism axis, magnitude of posterior astigmatism, magnitude of keratometric astigmatism, and axial length [AL]) were significantly associated with the absolute error in magnitude. Predictors including the difference in the anterior-posterior astigmatism axis, magnitude of posterior astigmatism, magnitude of keratometric astigmatism, and age were significantly associated with the absolute error in angle and magnitude of the error vector.
CONCLUSIONS: Neglecting posterior corneal astigmatism yielded significant estimation errors in total corneal astigmatism in patients preparing for cataract surgery. Estimation errors were significantly influenced by the difference in the anterior -posterior astigmatism axis, magnitude of posterior astigmatism, keratometric astigmatism, AL, and age.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: None of the authors has any conflicts of interest to disclose.