Comparing the postoperative refractive predictability of Pentacam HR and IOLMaster 500 after a multifocal intraocular lens implantation

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Andrade Junior,Newton
Data de Publicação: 2020
Outros Autores: Hida,Wilson Takashi, Messias,André Marcio Vieira, Lyra,João Marcelo, Silva,Carlos André Mont’Alverne, Alves,Milton Ruiz
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27492020000200141
Resumo: ABSTRACT Purpose: To compare the postoperative refractive predictability of IOLMaster 500 and Pentacam HR on the basis of keratometry and anterior chamber depth values in eyes with an indication for multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted on 118 eyes treated with phacoemulsification and multifocal intraocular lens implantation. Only the eyes that achieved emmetropia in the dynamic refraction performed on postoperative day 30 were included. Haigis’ formula was used in each case to calculate the intraocular lens power, and the intraocular lens with the target refraction closest to emmetropia was implanted. Four lens calculation scenarios were tested by combining keratometry and anterior chamber depth measurements obtained using the two devices. Results: IOLMaster 500 and Pentacam HR differed with regard to mean keratometry (D 0.07 ± 0.03 D; p=0.0065) and anterior chamber depth (D 0.08 ± 0.01 mm; p<0.001). In the analysis of covariance, the following differences were obtained using the Haigis’ formula when confronted with the biometric values obtained by inserting keratometry and anterior chamber depth values, respectively: Penta/IOL x IOL/Penta (0.13 ± 0.03; p<0.0001); Penta/Penta × IOL/Penta (0.13 ± 0.03; p<0.0001); Penta/IOL × IOL/IOL (0.11 ± 0.03; p=0.001); Penta/Penta × IOL/IOL (0.11 ± 0.03; p=0.002); IOL/IOL × IOL/Penta (0.02 ± 0.03; p=0.865); and Penta/IOL × Penta/Penta (0.002 ± 0.03; p=0.99). The difference was smaller when measuring the anterior chamber depth using the IOLMaster 500, regardless of which device was used to measure keratometry. Conclusions: Pentacam HR significantly differed from IOLMaster 500 when calculating keratometry. As regards the anterior chamber depth, the two devices were equally accurate.
id CBO-2_4f05de8cd118071d0528c1619390e287
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0004-27492020000200141
network_acronym_str CBO-2
network_name_str Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Comparing the postoperative refractive predictability of Pentacam HR and IOLMaster 500 after a multifocal intraocular lens implantationBiometryCataractInterferometryLenses, intraocularMultifocal intraocular lensesABSTRACT Purpose: To compare the postoperative refractive predictability of IOLMaster 500 and Pentacam HR on the basis of keratometry and anterior chamber depth values in eyes with an indication for multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted on 118 eyes treated with phacoemulsification and multifocal intraocular lens implantation. Only the eyes that achieved emmetropia in the dynamic refraction performed on postoperative day 30 were included. Haigis’ formula was used in each case to calculate the intraocular lens power, and the intraocular lens with the target refraction closest to emmetropia was implanted. Four lens calculation scenarios were tested by combining keratometry and anterior chamber depth measurements obtained using the two devices. Results: IOLMaster 500 and Pentacam HR differed with regard to mean keratometry (D 0.07 ± 0.03 D; p=0.0065) and anterior chamber depth (D 0.08 ± 0.01 mm; p<0.001). In the analysis of covariance, the following differences were obtained using the Haigis’ formula when confronted with the biometric values obtained by inserting keratometry and anterior chamber depth values, respectively: Penta/IOL x IOL/Penta (0.13 ± 0.03; p<0.0001); Penta/Penta × IOL/Penta (0.13 ± 0.03; p<0.0001); Penta/IOL × IOL/IOL (0.11 ± 0.03; p=0.001); Penta/Penta × IOL/IOL (0.11 ± 0.03; p=0.002); IOL/IOL × IOL/Penta (0.02 ± 0.03; p=0.865); and Penta/IOL × Penta/Penta (0.002 ± 0.03; p=0.99). The difference was smaller when measuring the anterior chamber depth using the IOLMaster 500, regardless of which device was used to measure keratometry. Conclusions: Pentacam HR significantly differed from IOLMaster 500 when calculating keratometry. As regards the anterior chamber depth, the two devices were equally accurate.Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia2020-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27492020000200141Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia v.83 n.2 2020reponame:Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)instname:Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO)instacron:CBO10.5935/0004-2749.20200026info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAndrade Junior,NewtonHida,Wilson TakashiMessias,André Marcio VieiraLyra,João MarceloSilva,Carlos André Mont’AlverneAlves,Milton Ruizeng2020-03-10T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0004-27492020000200141Revistahttp://aboonline.org.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpaboonline@cbo.com.br||abo@cbo.com.br1678-29250004-2749opendoar:2020-03-10T00:00Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online) - Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparing the postoperative refractive predictability of Pentacam HR and IOLMaster 500 after a multifocal intraocular lens implantation
title Comparing the postoperative refractive predictability of Pentacam HR and IOLMaster 500 after a multifocal intraocular lens implantation
spellingShingle Comparing the postoperative refractive predictability of Pentacam HR and IOLMaster 500 after a multifocal intraocular lens implantation
Andrade Junior,Newton
Biometry
Cataract
Interferometry
Lenses, intraocular
Multifocal intraocular lenses
title_short Comparing the postoperative refractive predictability of Pentacam HR and IOLMaster 500 after a multifocal intraocular lens implantation
title_full Comparing the postoperative refractive predictability of Pentacam HR and IOLMaster 500 after a multifocal intraocular lens implantation
title_fullStr Comparing the postoperative refractive predictability of Pentacam HR and IOLMaster 500 after a multifocal intraocular lens implantation
title_full_unstemmed Comparing the postoperative refractive predictability of Pentacam HR and IOLMaster 500 after a multifocal intraocular lens implantation
title_sort Comparing the postoperative refractive predictability of Pentacam HR and IOLMaster 500 after a multifocal intraocular lens implantation
author Andrade Junior,Newton
author_facet Andrade Junior,Newton
Hida,Wilson Takashi
Messias,André Marcio Vieira
Lyra,João Marcelo
Silva,Carlos André Mont’Alverne
Alves,Milton Ruiz
author_role author
author2 Hida,Wilson Takashi
Messias,André Marcio Vieira
Lyra,João Marcelo
Silva,Carlos André Mont’Alverne
Alves,Milton Ruiz
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Andrade Junior,Newton
Hida,Wilson Takashi
Messias,André Marcio Vieira
Lyra,João Marcelo
Silva,Carlos André Mont’Alverne
Alves,Milton Ruiz
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Biometry
Cataract
Interferometry
Lenses, intraocular
Multifocal intraocular lenses
topic Biometry
Cataract
Interferometry
Lenses, intraocular
Multifocal intraocular lenses
description ABSTRACT Purpose: To compare the postoperative refractive predictability of IOLMaster 500 and Pentacam HR on the basis of keratometry and anterior chamber depth values in eyes with an indication for multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted on 118 eyes treated with phacoemulsification and multifocal intraocular lens implantation. Only the eyes that achieved emmetropia in the dynamic refraction performed on postoperative day 30 were included. Haigis’ formula was used in each case to calculate the intraocular lens power, and the intraocular lens with the target refraction closest to emmetropia was implanted. Four lens calculation scenarios were tested by combining keratometry and anterior chamber depth measurements obtained using the two devices. Results: IOLMaster 500 and Pentacam HR differed with regard to mean keratometry (D 0.07 ± 0.03 D; p=0.0065) and anterior chamber depth (D 0.08 ± 0.01 mm; p<0.001). In the analysis of covariance, the following differences were obtained using the Haigis’ formula when confronted with the biometric values obtained by inserting keratometry and anterior chamber depth values, respectively: Penta/IOL x IOL/Penta (0.13 ± 0.03; p<0.0001); Penta/Penta × IOL/Penta (0.13 ± 0.03; p<0.0001); Penta/IOL × IOL/IOL (0.11 ± 0.03; p=0.001); Penta/Penta × IOL/IOL (0.11 ± 0.03; p=0.002); IOL/IOL × IOL/Penta (0.02 ± 0.03; p=0.865); and Penta/IOL × Penta/Penta (0.002 ± 0.03; p=0.99). The difference was smaller when measuring the anterior chamber depth using the IOLMaster 500, regardless of which device was used to measure keratometry. Conclusions: Pentacam HR significantly differed from IOLMaster 500 when calculating keratometry. As regards the anterior chamber depth, the two devices were equally accurate.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-04-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27492020000200141
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27492020000200141
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.5935/0004-2749.20200026
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia v.83 n.2 2020
reponame:Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)
instname:Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO)
instacron:CBO
instname_str Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO)
instacron_str CBO
institution CBO
reponame_str Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)
collection Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online) - Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv aboonline@cbo.com.br||abo@cbo.com.br
_version_ 1754209030748766208