Cargando…

Post-operative Refractive Prediction Error After Phacovitrectomy: A Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION: Many authors have reported on a myopic post-operative refractive prediction error when combining phacoemulsification with pars plana vitrectomy (phacovitrectomy). In this study we evaluate the amount of this error in our facility and try to elucidate the various factors involved. METHO...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hötte, Gijsbert J., de Bruyn, Daniël P., de Hoog, Joeri
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5997604/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29236212
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-017-0116-4
_version_ 1783331068197208064
author Hötte, Gijsbert J.
de Bruyn, Daniël P.
de Hoog, Joeri
author_facet Hötte, Gijsbert J.
de Bruyn, Daniël P.
de Hoog, Joeri
author_sort Hötte, Gijsbert J.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Many authors have reported on a myopic post-operative refractive prediction error when combining phacoemulsification with pars plana vitrectomy (phacovitrectomy). In this study we evaluate the amount of this error in our facility and try to elucidate the various factors involved. METHODS: This was a retrospective study which included 140 patients who underwent phacovitrectomy (39 with macular holes, 88 with puckers, and 13 with floaters). Post-operative refractive error was defined as the difference between the actual spherical equivalent (SEQ) and expected SEQ based on the SRK/T and Holladay-II formulas. Both univariate (paired t test, independent t test, one-way analysis of variance, or Mann–Whitney test) and multivariate (regression analysis) statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: Overall, a refractive error of − 0.13 dpt (p = 0.033) and − 0.26 dpt (p < 0.01) were found in the SRK/T and Holladay-II formulas, respectively. For the independent diagnoses, only macular holes showed a myopic error with the SRK/T (− 0.31 dpt; p < 0.01) and Holladay-II (− 0.44 dpt; p < 0.01) formulas. In univariate analysis, significant factors involved in myopic refractive error were macular hole as diagnosis (p < 0.01 for SRK/T and Holladay-II), gas tamponade (SRK/T p = 0.024; Holladay-II p = 0.025), pre-operative myopia (p < 0.01 for SRK/T), and optical technique for axial length measurement (SRK/T and Holladay-II p < 0.01). In the multivariate analysis, pre-operative axial length (p = 0.026), optical technique for axial length measurement (p < 0.01), and pre-operative SEQ (p < 0.01) were independent predictors for myopic refractive error in the SRK/T formula. For the Holladay-II formula, optical technique for axial length measurement (p < 0.01) and pre-operative SEQ (p = 0.04) were predictive. CONCLUSION: Various factors are involved in determining the myopic refractive error after phacovitrectomy. Not every factor seems to be as important in each individual patient, suggesting a more tailored approach is warranted to overcome this problem.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5997604
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59976042018-06-26 Post-operative Refractive Prediction Error After Phacovitrectomy: A Retrospective Study Hötte, Gijsbert J. de Bruyn, Daniël P. de Hoog, Joeri Ophthalmol Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: Many authors have reported on a myopic post-operative refractive prediction error when combining phacoemulsification with pars plana vitrectomy (phacovitrectomy). In this study we evaluate the amount of this error in our facility and try to elucidate the various factors involved. METHODS: This was a retrospective study which included 140 patients who underwent phacovitrectomy (39 with macular holes, 88 with puckers, and 13 with floaters). Post-operative refractive error was defined as the difference between the actual spherical equivalent (SEQ) and expected SEQ based on the SRK/T and Holladay-II formulas. Both univariate (paired t test, independent t test, one-way analysis of variance, or Mann–Whitney test) and multivariate (regression analysis) statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: Overall, a refractive error of − 0.13 dpt (p = 0.033) and − 0.26 dpt (p < 0.01) were found in the SRK/T and Holladay-II formulas, respectively. For the independent diagnoses, only macular holes showed a myopic error with the SRK/T (− 0.31 dpt; p < 0.01) and Holladay-II (− 0.44 dpt; p < 0.01) formulas. In univariate analysis, significant factors involved in myopic refractive error were macular hole as diagnosis (p < 0.01 for SRK/T and Holladay-II), gas tamponade (SRK/T p = 0.024; Holladay-II p = 0.025), pre-operative myopia (p < 0.01 for SRK/T), and optical technique for axial length measurement (SRK/T and Holladay-II p < 0.01). In the multivariate analysis, pre-operative axial length (p = 0.026), optical technique for axial length measurement (p < 0.01), and pre-operative SEQ (p < 0.01) were independent predictors for myopic refractive error in the SRK/T formula. For the Holladay-II formula, optical technique for axial length measurement (p < 0.01) and pre-operative SEQ (p = 0.04) were predictive. CONCLUSION: Various factors are involved in determining the myopic refractive error after phacovitrectomy. Not every factor seems to be as important in each individual patient, suggesting a more tailored approach is warranted to overcome this problem. Springer Healthcare 2017-12-13 2018-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5997604/ /pubmed/29236212 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-017-0116-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Research
Hötte, Gijsbert J.
de Bruyn, Daniël P.
de Hoog, Joeri
Post-operative Refractive Prediction Error After Phacovitrectomy: A Retrospective Study
title Post-operative Refractive Prediction Error After Phacovitrectomy: A Retrospective Study
title_full Post-operative Refractive Prediction Error After Phacovitrectomy: A Retrospective Study
title_fullStr Post-operative Refractive Prediction Error After Phacovitrectomy: A Retrospective Study
title_full_unstemmed Post-operative Refractive Prediction Error After Phacovitrectomy: A Retrospective Study
title_short Post-operative Refractive Prediction Error After Phacovitrectomy: A Retrospective Study
title_sort post-operative refractive prediction error after phacovitrectomy: a retrospective study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5997604/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29236212
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-017-0116-4
work_keys_str_mv AT hottegijsbertj postoperativerefractivepredictionerrorafterphacovitrectomyaretrospectivestudy
AT debruyndanielp postoperativerefractivepredictionerrorafterphacovitrectomyaretrospectivestudy
AT dehoogjoeri postoperativerefractivepredictionerrorafterphacovitrectomyaretrospectivestudy