Refractive Outcomes With New Generation Formulas for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Radial Keratotomy Patients
Refractive Outcomes With New Generation Formulas for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Radial Keratotomy Patients
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/ico.0000000000003301
复制
发表时间：
2024-02-01
期刊：
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Rizzo，Stanislao
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ferrara，Silvia;Crincoli，Emanuele;Rizzo，Stanislao
目的：放射状角膜切开术（RK）是导致角膜不规则的原因，导致生物计量误差和较低的最佳矫正视力（BCVA），由于低阶和高阶光学像差。本研究的目的是比较性能的新一代和老一代的公式在人口RK patients.Methods：RK患者谁接受超声乳化人工晶状体植入术回顾性招募。入选标准是术前和术后6个月BCVA评估、地形图和断层扫描的可用性。排除标准为有记录的屈光不稳、角膜扩张和除RK外的既往眼部手术。计算SRK-T、Barrett True K、EVO 2.0、Kane和PEARL-DGS的平均预测误差（ME）、平均绝对预测误差（MAE）和MAE> 0.25 D的发生率。结果：纳入了27例患者，平均基线BCVA为0.32±0.18 logMAR，平均角膜均方根（RMS）值为1.59±0.91 μm。EVO 2.0、Kane和PEARL-DGS与所有其他配方相比显示出显著更低的MAE和更低的ME（P< 0.001和P< 0.001），并且MAE> 0.25 D的发生率显著更低（P< 0.001）。显着差异仍然检测时，使用3毫米平均角膜曲率为IOL calculation.Conclusions：PEARL-DGS，凯恩，和EVO 2.0公式显示上级准确性在IOL的功率计算相比，SRK-T和巴雷特真K在RK患者，3之间没有显着差异。
Purpose:Radial keratotomies (RKs) are responsible for corneal irregularities resulting in biometric errors and lower best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) due to lower-order and higher-order optical aberrations. The aim of the study was to compare performances of new and old generation formulas in a population of RK patients.Methods:RK patients who underwent phacoemulsification with IOL implantation were retrospectively recruited. Inclusion criteria were availability of preoperative and 6-month postoperative BCVA assessment, topography, and tomography. Documented refraction instability, corneal ectasia, and previous ocular surgery except for RK were exclusion criteria. Mean prediction error (ME), mean absolute prediction error (MAE), and incidence of MAE> 0.25 D were calculated for SRK-T, Barrett True K, EVO 2.0, Kane, and PEARL-DGS.Results:Twenty-seven patients with a mean baseline BCVA of 0.32±0.18 logMAR and a mean corneal root mean square (RMS) value of 1.59±0.91 μm were included. EVO 2.0, Kane, and PEARL-DGS showed a significantly lower MAE and lower ME compared with all other formulas (P< 0.001 and P< 0.001) and a significant lower incidence of MAE> 0.25 D (P< 0.001). Significant differences were still detected when using 3-mm mean keratometry for IOL calculation.Conclusions:PEARL-DGS, Kane, and EVO 2.0 formulas show superior accuracy in IOL power calculation compared with SRK-T and Barrett True K in RK patients, with no significant differences between the 3.