Meta-analysis of accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation formulas in short eyes
Meta-analysis of accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation formulas in short eyes
复制标题
短眼人工晶状体度数计算公式准确性的Meta分析
DOI：
10.1111/ceo.13058
复制
发表时间：
2018-05-01
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
Chen, Weirong
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Wang, Qiwei;Jiang, Wu;Chen, Weirong
重要性人工晶状体（IOL）度数的选择是影响短眼人工晶状体植入术后视力的关键因素。许多公式已经开发，以实现一个精确的预测人工晶状体的力量。然而，关于准确性的争议仍然存在。背景：探讨不同人工晶状体度数计算公式在短眼患者中的准确性。参与者：既往研究中眼轴长度小于22mm的患者。方法于2016年10月前在Pubmed、EMBASE、Cochrane系统评价数据库和Cochrane中央对照试验注册库中进行综合检索。我们使用改进的QUADAS-2工具评估方法学质量，并对不同公式之间的平均绝对误差（MAE）加权平均差异进行分析。主要观察指标用加权平均差和95%置信区间评价MAE组间差异。结果纳入10项观察性研究，共1161只眼，比较了6种配方：Haigis、Holladay 2、Hoffer Q、Holladay 1、SRK/T和SRK II。其中Holladay 2引入的总MAE最小（0.496D），无统计学意义。Haigis与Hoffer Q（平均差异=-0.07D， P=0.003）、Haigis与SRK/T（平均差异=-0.07D， P=0.009）、Haigis与SRK II（平均差异=-0.41D， P=0.01）的MAE差异均有统计学意义。对于发表偏倚和小研究效应，漏斗图和egger检验均未发现统计学发现。结论与相关性本研究的综合证据证实了Haigis在预测短眼人工晶状体度数方面优于Hoffer Q、SRK/T和SRK II。
ImportanceIntraocular lens (IOL) power selection is a critical factor affecting visual outcome after IOL implantation in short eyes. Many formulas have been developed to achieve a precise prediction of the IOL power. However, controversy regarding the accuracy remains.BackgroundTo investigate the accuracy of different IOL power calculation formulas in short eyes.DesignMeta-analysis.ParticipantsPatients with the axial length of eyes less than 22mm from previously reported studies.MethodsA comprehensive search in Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane Data Base of Systematic Reviews and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted by October 2016. We assessed the methodological quality using a modified QUADAS-2 tool and performed analysis on weighted mean differences of mean absolute errors (MAE) among different formulas.Main Outcomes MeasuresThe between-group difference of MAE was evaluated with weighted mean difference and 95% confidence intervals.ResultsTen observational studies, involving 1161 eyes, were enrolled to compare six formulas: Haigis, Holladay 2, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, SRK/T and SRK II. Among them, the Holladay 2 introduced the smallest overall MAE (0.496D) without statistical significance. The difference of MAE is statistically significant between Haigis and Hoffer Q (mean difference=-0.07D, P=0.003), Haigis and SRK/T (mean difference=-0.07D, P=0.009), Haigis and SRK II (mean difference=-0.41D, P=0.01). For publication bias and small-study effect, neither funnel plot nor egger's test detected statistical finding.Conclusion and RelevanceThe overall evidence from the studies confirmed the superiority of Haigis over Hoffer Q, SRK/T and SRK II in prediction IOL power in short eyes.