Intraocular lens power calculation by measuring axial length with partial optical coherence and ultrasonic biometry
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2011 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0004-27492011000300004 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/6481 |
Resumo: | PURPOSE: To compare the achieved refractive outcomes of patients undergoing cataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation performed by conventional immersion ultrasound (US) or partial coherence interferometry (PCI). METHODS: Prospective, comparative case series. Patients undergoing cataract surgery were randomly divided in two groups with regard to the IOL power calculation method. Group 1 had calculations performed by PCI (IOL Master; Carl Zeiss Meditec), while US was used in Group 2 (Ultrascan; Alcon), using the Holladay 1 formula. Differences between target and achieved refractions were then compared. RESULTS: The study comprised 120 eyes from 79 patients. Biometry with PCI was used in 50 eyes of 33 patients, and US was used in 70 eyes of 46 patients. Mean age of patients in the PCI Group was 69.8 ± 13.1 years (range 11 - 85) and 70.0 ± 9.3 (45 - 86) in the US Group (P=0.7165). Mean axial length measured by PCI was 23.22 ± 1.00 mm (range 21.01 - 25.45) and that by US was 23.22 ± 1.06 mm (20.05 - 25.78) (P=0.9110). Mean absolute error in the PCI group was 0.15 ± 0.33 D (range -0.65 - 0.9) and that in the US group was 0.26 ± 0.48 D (-1.05 - 1.76). All eyes in the PCI group and 94.3% of those in the US group were within 1.00 D of the planned refraction. CONCLUSION: Although both PCI and US yielded good prediction in IOL power calculation, the PCI group tended to show better accuracy and improved refractive outcome. |
id |
UFSP_bfaa6984a2632dd00be114865f6106f3 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/6481 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
repository_id_str |
3465 |
spelling |
Intraocular lens power calculation by measuring axial length with partial optical coherence and ultrasonic biometryCálculo da dioptria da lente intraocular medindo o comprimento axial através de interferometria de coerência parcial ou biometria ultrassônicaDiagnostic techniques, ophthalmologicalPreoperative careCataract extractionLens implantation, intraocularRefractive errorsTécnicas de diagnóstico oftalmológicoCuidados pré-operatóriosExtração de catarataImplante de lente intraocularErros de refraçãoPURPOSE: To compare the achieved refractive outcomes of patients undergoing cataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation performed by conventional immersion ultrasound (US) or partial coherence interferometry (PCI). METHODS: Prospective, comparative case series. Patients undergoing cataract surgery were randomly divided in two groups with regard to the IOL power calculation method. Group 1 had calculations performed by PCI (IOL Master; Carl Zeiss Meditec), while US was used in Group 2 (Ultrascan; Alcon), using the Holladay 1 formula. Differences between target and achieved refractions were then compared. RESULTS: The study comprised 120 eyes from 79 patients. Biometry with PCI was used in 50 eyes of 33 patients, and US was used in 70 eyes of 46 patients. Mean age of patients in the PCI Group was 69.8 ± 13.1 years (range 11 - 85) and 70.0 ± 9.3 (45 - 86) in the US Group (P=0.7165). Mean axial length measured by PCI was 23.22 ± 1.00 mm (range 21.01 - 25.45) and that by US was 23.22 ± 1.06 mm (20.05 - 25.78) (P=0.9110). Mean absolute error in the PCI group was 0.15 ± 0.33 D (range -0.65 - 0.9) and that in the US group was 0.26 ± 0.48 D (-1.05 - 1.76). All eyes in the PCI group and 94.3% of those in the US group were within 1.00 D of the planned refraction. CONCLUSION: Although both PCI and US yielded good prediction in IOL power calculation, the PCI group tended to show better accuracy and improved refractive outcome.OBJETIVO: Comparar os resultados refracionais obtidos em pacientes submetidos à cirurgia de catarata com cálculo da lente intraocular realizado por meio de biometria ultrassônica de imersão (US) ou por interferometria de coerência parcial (ICP). MÉTODOS: Série de casos comparativa, prospectiva. Os pacientes submetidos à cirurgia de catarata foram aleatoriamente divididos em dois grupos em relação ao método de cálculo do poder da lente intraocular (LIO) a ser implantada. O grupo 1 teve seu cálculo efetuado por ICP (IOL Master; Carl Zeiss Meditec), enquanto o grupo 2 usou-se US (Ultrascan; Alcon). A fórmula Holladay 1 foi utilizada nos dois grupos. As diferenças entre os resultados refracionais planejados e obtidos foram então comparadas. RESULTADOS: O estudo contou com 120 olhos de 79 pacientes. Biometria por meio de ICP foi utilizada em 50 olhos de 33 pacientes e com US em 70 olhos de 46 pacientes. A idade média dos pacientes no grupo 1 foi de 69,8 ± 13,1 anos e de 70,0 ± 9,3 anos no grupo 2 (P=0,7165). O comprimento axial médio aferido pela ICP foi de 23,22 ± 1,00 mm (variando de 21,01 a 25,45 mm) e no grupo US foi de 23,22 ± 1,06 mm (variando de 20,05 a 25,78 mm) (P=0,9110). O erro absoluto médio (diferença entre o planejado e o obtido) no grupo 1 foi de 0,15 ± 0,33 D (variando de -0,65 a 0,9 D) e no grupo 2 de 0,26 ± 0,48 D (variando de -1,05 a 1,76 D). Todos os olhos do grupo 1 e 94,3% dos olhos do grupo 2 obtiveram resultados refracionais de até 1,00 D de diferença do resultado refracional inicialmente planejado. CONCLUSÃO: Os dois métodos estudados mostraram boa previsibilidade refracional quando utilizados para o cálculo do poder da LIO. No entanto, o grupo que utilizou ICP mostrou uma tendência a melhor acurácia, com menos dispersão de resultados.Centro de Microcirurgia e DiagnósticoFederal University of São Paulo Ophthalmology DepartmentOftalmoclínica MéierUNIFESP, Ophthalmology DepartmentSciELOConselho Brasileiro de OftalmologiaCentro de Microcirurgia e DiagnósticoUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Oftalmoclínica MéierFontes, Beatriz MachadoFontes, Bruno Machado [UNIFESP]Castro, Elaine2015-06-14T13:43:06Z2015-06-14T13:43:06Z2011-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion166-170application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0004-27492011000300004Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia. Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia, v. 74, n. 3, p. 166-170, 2011.10.1590/S0004-27492011000300004S0004-27492011000300004.pdf0004-2749S0004-27492011000300004http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/6481engArquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologiainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESPinstname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)instacron:UNIFESP2024-08-05T02:49:26Zoai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/6481Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.unifesp.br/oai/requestbiblioteca.csp@unifesp.bropendoar:34652024-08-05T02:49:26Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Intraocular lens power calculation by measuring axial length with partial optical coherence and ultrasonic biometry Cálculo da dioptria da lente intraocular medindo o comprimento axial através de interferometria de coerência parcial ou biometria ultrassônica |
title |
Intraocular lens power calculation by measuring axial length with partial optical coherence and ultrasonic biometry |
spellingShingle |
Intraocular lens power calculation by measuring axial length with partial optical coherence and ultrasonic biometry Fontes, Beatriz Machado Diagnostic techniques, ophthalmological Preoperative care Cataract extraction Lens implantation, intraocular Refractive errors Técnicas de diagnóstico oftalmológico Cuidados pré-operatórios Extração de catarata Implante de lente intraocular Erros de refração |
title_short |
Intraocular lens power calculation by measuring axial length with partial optical coherence and ultrasonic biometry |
title_full |
Intraocular lens power calculation by measuring axial length with partial optical coherence and ultrasonic biometry |
title_fullStr |
Intraocular lens power calculation by measuring axial length with partial optical coherence and ultrasonic biometry |
title_full_unstemmed |
Intraocular lens power calculation by measuring axial length with partial optical coherence and ultrasonic biometry |
title_sort |
Intraocular lens power calculation by measuring axial length with partial optical coherence and ultrasonic biometry |
author |
Fontes, Beatriz Machado |
author_facet |
Fontes, Beatriz Machado Fontes, Bruno Machado [UNIFESP] Castro, Elaine |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Fontes, Bruno Machado [UNIFESP] Castro, Elaine |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Centro de Microcirurgia e Diagnóstico Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) Oftalmoclínica Méier |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Fontes, Beatriz Machado Fontes, Bruno Machado [UNIFESP] Castro, Elaine |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Diagnostic techniques, ophthalmological Preoperative care Cataract extraction Lens implantation, intraocular Refractive errors Técnicas de diagnóstico oftalmológico Cuidados pré-operatórios Extração de catarata Implante de lente intraocular Erros de refração |
topic |
Diagnostic techniques, ophthalmological Preoperative care Cataract extraction Lens implantation, intraocular Refractive errors Técnicas de diagnóstico oftalmológico Cuidados pré-operatórios Extração de catarata Implante de lente intraocular Erros de refração |
description |
PURPOSE: To compare the achieved refractive outcomes of patients undergoing cataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation performed by conventional immersion ultrasound (US) or partial coherence interferometry (PCI). METHODS: Prospective, comparative case series. Patients undergoing cataract surgery were randomly divided in two groups with regard to the IOL power calculation method. Group 1 had calculations performed by PCI (IOL Master; Carl Zeiss Meditec), while US was used in Group 2 (Ultrascan; Alcon), using the Holladay 1 formula. Differences between target and achieved refractions were then compared. RESULTS: The study comprised 120 eyes from 79 patients. Biometry with PCI was used in 50 eyes of 33 patients, and US was used in 70 eyes of 46 patients. Mean age of patients in the PCI Group was 69.8 ± 13.1 years (range 11 - 85) and 70.0 ± 9.3 (45 - 86) in the US Group (P=0.7165). Mean axial length measured by PCI was 23.22 ± 1.00 mm (range 21.01 - 25.45) and that by US was 23.22 ± 1.06 mm (20.05 - 25.78) (P=0.9110). Mean absolute error in the PCI group was 0.15 ± 0.33 D (range -0.65 - 0.9) and that in the US group was 0.26 ± 0.48 D (-1.05 - 1.76). All eyes in the PCI group and 94.3% of those in the US group were within 1.00 D of the planned refraction. CONCLUSION: Although both PCI and US yielded good prediction in IOL power calculation, the PCI group tended to show better accuracy and improved refractive outcome. |
publishDate |
2011 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2011-06-01 2015-06-14T13:43:06Z 2015-06-14T13:43:06Z |
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://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0004-27492011000300004 Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia. Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia, v. 74, n. 3, p. 166-170, 2011. 10.1590/S0004-27492011000300004 S0004-27492011000300004.pdf 0004-2749 S0004-27492011000300004 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/6481 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0004-27492011000300004 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/6481 |
identifier_str_mv |
Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia. Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia, v. 74, n. 3, p. 166-170, 2011. 10.1590/S0004-27492011000300004 S0004-27492011000300004.pdf 0004-2749 S0004-27492011000300004 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
166-170 application/pdf |
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 |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP instname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) instacron:UNIFESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
instacron_str |
UNIFESP |
institution |
UNIFESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
biblioteca.csp@unifesp.br |
_version_ |
1814268463865135104 |