Cargando…

Refractive outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens power calculation

PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in eyes undergoing cataract surgery with monofocal IOL implantation. METHODS: Preoperative data were obtained with the IOLMaster. Intraoperative aphakic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Zina, Thomas, Logan William, Leu, Szu-Yen, Carter, Steven, Garg, Sumit
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5621262/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28905823
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_163_17
_version_ 1783267722850729984
author Zhang, Zina
Thomas, Logan William
Leu, Szu-Yen
Carter, Steven
Garg, Sumit
author_facet Zhang, Zina
Thomas, Logan William
Leu, Szu-Yen
Carter, Steven
Garg, Sumit
author_sort Zhang, Zina
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in eyes undergoing cataract surgery with monofocal IOL implantation. METHODS: Preoperative data were obtained with the IOLMaster. Intraoperative aphakic measurements and IOL power calculations were obtained in some patients with the optiwave refractive analysis (ORA) system. Analysis was performed to determine the accuracy of monofocal IOL power prediction and postoperative manifest refraction at 1 month of the ORA versus IOLMaster. RESULTS: Two hundred and ninety-five eyes reviewed, 61 had only preoperative IOLMaster measurements and 234 had both IOLMaster and ORA measurements. Of these 234 eyes, 6 were excluded, 107 had the same recommended IOL power by ORA and IOLMaster. Sixty-four percent of these eyes were within ±0.5D. 95 eyes had IOL power implantation based on ORA instead of IOLMaster. Seventy percent of these eyes were within ±0.5D of target refraction. 26 eyes had IOL power chosen based on IOLMaster predictions instead of ORA. Sixty-five percent were within ±0.5D. In the group with IOLMaster without ORA measurements, 80% of eyes were within ±0.5D of target refraction. The absolute error was statistically smaller in those eyes where the ORA and IOLMaster recommended the same IOL power based on preoperative target refraction compared to instances in which IOL selection was based on ORA or IOLMaster alone. Neither prediction errors were statistically different between the ORA and IOLMaster alone. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative wavefront aberrometry with the ORA system provides postoperative refractive results comparable to conventional biometry with the IOLMaster for monofocal IOL selection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5621262
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56212622017-10-04 Refractive outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens power calculation Zhang, Zina Thomas, Logan William Leu, Szu-Yen Carter, Steven Garg, Sumit Indian J Ophthalmol Original Article PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in eyes undergoing cataract surgery with monofocal IOL implantation. METHODS: Preoperative data were obtained with the IOLMaster. Intraoperative aphakic measurements and IOL power calculations were obtained in some patients with the optiwave refractive analysis (ORA) system. Analysis was performed to determine the accuracy of monofocal IOL power prediction and postoperative manifest refraction at 1 month of the ORA versus IOLMaster. RESULTS: Two hundred and ninety-five eyes reviewed, 61 had only preoperative IOLMaster measurements and 234 had both IOLMaster and ORA measurements. Of these 234 eyes, 6 were excluded, 107 had the same recommended IOL power by ORA and IOLMaster. Sixty-four percent of these eyes were within ±0.5D. 95 eyes had IOL power implantation based on ORA instead of IOLMaster. Seventy percent of these eyes were within ±0.5D of target refraction. 26 eyes had IOL power chosen based on IOLMaster predictions instead of ORA. Sixty-five percent were within ±0.5D. In the group with IOLMaster without ORA measurements, 80% of eyes were within ±0.5D of target refraction. The absolute error was statistically smaller in those eyes where the ORA and IOLMaster recommended the same IOL power based on preoperative target refraction compared to instances in which IOL selection was based on ORA or IOLMaster alone. Neither prediction errors were statistically different between the ORA and IOLMaster alone. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative wavefront aberrometry with the ORA system provides postoperative refractive results comparable to conventional biometry with the IOLMaster for monofocal IOL selection. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5621262/ /pubmed/28905823 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_163_17 Text en Copyright: © 2017 Indian Journal of Ophthalmology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Zhang, Zina
Thomas, Logan William
Leu, Szu-Yen
Carter, Steven
Garg, Sumit
Refractive outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens power calculation
title Refractive outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens power calculation
title_full Refractive outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens power calculation
title_fullStr Refractive outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens power calculation
title_full_unstemmed Refractive outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens power calculation
title_short Refractive outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens power calculation
title_sort refractive outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens power calculation
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5621262/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28905823
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_163_17
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangzina refractiveoutcomesofintraoperativewavefrontaberrometryversusopticalbiometryaloneforintraocularlenspowercalculation
AT thomasloganwilliam refractiveoutcomesofintraoperativewavefrontaberrometryversusopticalbiometryaloneforintraocularlenspowercalculation
AT leuszuyen refractiveoutcomesofintraoperativewavefrontaberrometryversusopticalbiometryaloneforintraocularlenspowercalculation
AT cartersteven refractiveoutcomesofintraoperativewavefrontaberrometryversusopticalbiometryaloneforintraocularlenspowercalculation
AT gargsumit refractiveoutcomesofintraoperativewavefrontaberrometryversusopticalbiometryaloneforintraocularlenspowercalculation