目的:研究人工晶状体(IOL)计算公式的准确性,并探讨扫频源光学相干断层扫描生物仪(IOLMaster700)测量的前房深度(ACD)和晶状体厚度(LT)对后房型人工晶状体(PC-pIOL)患者的影响。
方法:回顾性病例系列。IOLMaster700生物测量仪用于测量轴向长度(AL)和眼前节参数。传统公式(SRK/T,Holladay1和Haigis)有或没有Wang-Koch(WK)AL调整,和新一代公式(巴雷特通用II[BUII],Emmetrypia验证光学[EVO]v2.0,凯恩,Pearl-DGS)用于IOL功率计算。
结果:本研究纳入了厦门大学厦门眼科中心接受PC-pIOL摘除联合白内障手术的24例患者的24只眼,厦门,福建,中国。按升序排列的中值绝对预测误差为EVO2.0(0.33),凯恩(0.35),SRK/T-WKmodified(0.42),Holladay1-WKmodified(0.44),Haigis-WKC1(0.46),Pearl-DGS(0.47),BUII(0.58),海吉斯(0.75),SRK/T(0.79),和Holladay1(1.32)。均方根绝对误差升序为Haigis-WKC1(0.591),Holladay1-WKmodified(0.622),SRK/T-WKmodified(0.623),EVO(0.673),凯恩(0.678),Pearl-DGS(0.753),BUII(0.863),海吉斯(1.061),SRK/T(1.188),和Holladay1(1.513)。对ACD和LT测量误差的详细分析显示,当在公式计算中合并或省略这些参数时,BUII和EVO2.0对屈光结果的影响可忽略不计。
结论:凯恩,EVO2.0和具有WKAL调整的传统公式显示出较高的预测精度。此外,在植入PC-pIOL的高度近视眼中,ACD和LT测量误差对IOL功率计算公式的准确性没有显着影响。
OBJECTIVE: To research the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas and investigate the effect of anterior chamber depth (ACD) and lens thickness (LT) measured by swept-source optical coherence tomography biometer (IOLMaster 700) in patients with posterior chamber phakic IOL (PC-pIOL).
METHODS: Retrospective case series. The IOLMaster 700 biometer was used to measure axial length (AL) and anterior segment parameters. The traditional formulas (SRK/T, Holladay 1 and Haigis) with or without Wang-Koch (WK) AL adjustment, and new-generation formulas (Barret Universal II [BUII], Emmetropia Verifying Optical [EVO] v2.0, Kane, Pearl-DGS) were utilized in IOL power calculation.
RESULTS: This study enrolled 24 eyes of 24 patients undergoing combined PC-pIOL removal and cataract surgery at Xiamen Eye Center of Xiamen University, Xiamen, Fujian, China. The median absolute prediction error in ascending order was EVO 2.0 (0.33), Kane (0.35), SRK/T-WKmodified (0.42), Holladay 1-WKmodified (0.44), Haigis-WKC1 (0.46), Pearl-DGS (0.47), BUII (0.58), Haigis (0.75), SRK/T (0.79), and Holladay 1 (1.32). The root-mean-square absolute error in ascending order was Haigis-WKC1 (0.591), Holladay 1-WKmodified (0.622), SRK/T-WKmodified (0.623), EVO (0.673), Kane (0.678), Pearl-DGS (0.753), BUII (0.863), Haigis (1.061), SRK/T (1.188), and Holladay 1 (1.513). A detailed analysis of ACD and LT measurement error revealed negligible impact on refractive outcomes in BUII and EVO 2.0 when these parameters were incorporated or omitted in the formula calculation.
CONCLUSIONS: The Kane, EVO 2.0, and traditional formulas with WK AL adjustment displayed high prediction accuracy. Furthermore, the ACD and LT measurement error does not exert a significant influence on the accuracy of IOL power calculation formulas in highly myopic eyes implanted with PC-pIOL.