首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Ophthalmic and Vision Research >Biometry and Intraocular Lens Power Calculation by Combined Scheimpflug-Placido Disc versus Optical Interferometry Devices
【24h】

Biometry and Intraocular Lens Power Calculation by Combined Scheimpflug-Placido Disc versus Optical Interferometry Devices

机译:通过组合 Scheimpflug-Placido 圆盘与光学干涉测量设备进行生物测量和人工晶状体屈光度计算

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Purpose: To compare the results of the current gold standard, laser interferometry, and keratometry by the IOL-Master, with a newly developed Galilei G6 using raytracing software Okulix for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations. Methods: For comparison of the IOL-power calculation of both devices, we analyzed the difference between the actual one-month postoperative subjective refraction and the theoretically calculated target refraction before cataract surgery. The IOL was selected according to the IOL Master recommendation aiming for emmetropia after surgery. We analyzed the differences of the measurements of the basic biometric data in 205 healthy eyes by each device. Results: Our study included 205 healthy, unoperated eyes from 117 patients (61 women, 56 men) aged 20 to 75 years. Twenty-two eyes of cataract patients were also included in this retrospective study design. The mean difference between the prediction of the postoperative refraction and the refraction actually achieved was 0.03 D for the IOL Master and -0.23 D for the Galilei G6. The difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.059). The difference between the IOL power calculation of the IOL Master and the calculation of the G6 was not statistically significant (P = 0.064). The difference between the predicted refraction of the G6 and the refraction achieved after one month was also not statistically significant (P = 0.12) and neither was the difference between the predicted refraction of the IOL Master and the achieved refraction (P = 0.39). The mean axial length was calculated as 24.21 +/- 0.80 mm using the IOL Master and 24.27 +/- 0.82 mm using the Galilei G6 device. The mean value regarding anterior chamber depth (ACD) of the IOL master was 3.46 +/- 0.23 mm and for the Galilei was G6 3.51 +/- 0.25 mm. When comparing the white to white ( WTW) values of the IOL master, it showed mean values of 12.32 +/- 0.31 and Galilei showed mean values of G6 12.21 +/- 0.28. All of these differences ( between Galileo and IOL Master measurements) were statistically significant (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Both the laser interferometry/keratometry performed by the IOL Master and the interferometry/raytracing biometry strategy performed by the Galilei G6 demonstrated equal results when executing the IOL power calculation before cataract surgery in eyes with no prior ocular surgery.
机译:目的:将 IOL-Master 的当前黄金标准、激光干涉测量和角膜曲率测量的结果与使用光线追踪软件 Okulix 进行人工晶状体 (IOL) 功率计算的新开发的 Galilei G6 进行比较。方法:比较两种装置的人工晶状体屈光度计算,分析白内障手术前实际术后1个月主观屈光度与理论计算目标屈光度的差异。人工晶状体是根据 IOL Master 推荐选择的,旨在治疗术后屈光。我们分析了每种设备在 205 只健康眼睛中测量基本生物特征数据的差异。结果:我们的研究包括来自117名年龄在20至75岁之间的患者(61名女性,56名男性)的205只健康,未手术的眼睛。这项回顾性研究设计还包括 22 只白内障患者的眼睛。术后屈光率预测值与实际屈光率之间的平均差值为 IOL Master 的 0.03 D,Galilei G6 的 -0.23 D。差异无统计学意义(P = 0.059)。人工晶状体主晶状体的人工晶状体功率计算与G6的计算之间的差异没有统计学意义(P = 0.064)。G6 的预测屈光率与一个月后达到的屈光率之间的差异也没有统计学意义 (P = 0.12) 并且 IOL Master 的预测屈光度与实现的屈光度之间的差异也没有 (P = 0.39)。使用 IOL Master 计算的平均轴向长度为 24.21 +/- 0.80 mm,使用 Galilei G6 设备计算为 24.27 +/- 0.82 mm。人工晶状体主晶状体的前房深度 (ACD) 平均值为 3.46 +/- 0.23 mm,伽利略为 G6 3.51 +/- 0.25 mm。当比较人工晶状体母版的白色与白色 (WTW) 值时,它的平均值为 12.32 +/- 0.31,伽利略的平均值为 G6 12.21 +/- 0.28。所有这些差异(伽利略和人工晶状体主测量之间)均具有统计学意义(P < 0.001)。结论:人工晶状体主站进行的激光干涉测量/角膜曲率测量和伽利略 G6 执行的干涉测量/光线追踪生物测量策略在白内障手术前对既往没有眼科手术的眼睛进行人工晶状体屈光度计算时表现出相同的结果。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号