Refractive prediction error in cataract surgery using an optical biometer equipped with anterior segment OCT

Refractive prediction error in cataract surgery using an optical biometer equipped with anterior segment OCT

To evaluate refractive error after cataract surgery using an optical biometer equipped with anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT). Chukyo Eye Clinic, Nagoya, Japan. Retrospective observational design. In total, 150 patients with cataract (150 eyes, mean age 73.4 ± 8.2 years, men 76,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of cataract and refractive surgery Vol. 48; no. 4; pp. 429 - 434
Main Authors: Kato, Yukihito, Kojima, Takashi, Tamaoki, Akeno, Ichikawa, Kei, Tamura, Kensei, Ichikawa, Kazuo
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: United States 01-04-2022
Subjects:
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biometry - methods
Cataract
Female
Humans
Lens Implantation, Intraocular - methods
Lenses, Intraocular
Male
Optics and Photonics
Phacoemulsification - methods
Refraction, Ocular
Refractive Errors - diagnosis
Retrospective Studies
Tomography, Optical Coherence - methods
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To evaluate refractive error after cataract surgery using an optical biometer equipped with anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT). Chukyo Eye Clinic, Nagoya, Japan. Retrospective observational design. In total, 150 patients with cataract (150 eyes, mean age 73.4 ± 8.2 years, men 76, women 74), who underwent measurement of parameters with the AS-OCT scanners ANTERION (AS-OCTB) and IOLMaster 700 (OCTB) before cataract surgery, were enrolled in the study. Refractive prediction error was compared between the 2 devices using the SRK/T, Haigis, and Barrett Universal II (UII) formulas for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation. There were significant differences between AS-OCTB and OCTB in axial length, mean corneal refractive power, anterior chamber depth, lens thickness, and corneal diameter (n = 150). In the SRK/T formula, the arithmetic means of refractive prediction errors for AS-OCTB and OCTB were -0.06 ± 0.46 diopters (D) and 0.02 ± 0.42 D, respectively. In the Haigis formula, the arithmetic means of refractive prediction errors for AS-OCTB and OCTB were -0.23 ± 0.40 D and -0.08 ± 0.35 D, respectively. In the Barrett UII formula, the arithmetic means of refractive prediction errors for AS-OCTB and OCTB were -0.02 ± 0.38 D and 0.11 ± 0.36 D, respectively. AS-OCTB showed significantly larger refractive prediction error toward myopia than OCTB in all 3 formulas (P < .0001). The refractive prediction error using AS-OCTB showed a small difference from that using OCTB. While clinically comparable, the 2 methods could drive meaningful differences in IOL selection.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0886-3350
1873-4502
DOI:10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000781