Cargando…

Comparison of Phakic Intraocular Lens Vault Using Conventional Nomogram and Prediction Formulas

This study aimed to compare the achieved vault using a manufacturer’s nomogram and the predicted vault using the currently available prediction formulas after posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens (EVO Implantable Collamer Lens; ICL, STAAR Surgical) implantation. We included 200 eyes of 100 cons...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ando, Wakako, Kamiya, Kazutaka, Hayakawa, Hideki, Takahashi, Masahide, Shoji, Nobuyuki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7765914/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33352917
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9124090
_version_ 1783628593740382208
author Ando, Wakako
Kamiya, Kazutaka
Hayakawa, Hideki
Takahashi, Masahide
Shoji, Nobuyuki
author_facet Ando, Wakako
Kamiya, Kazutaka
Hayakawa, Hideki
Takahashi, Masahide
Shoji, Nobuyuki
author_sort Ando, Wakako
collection PubMed
description This study aimed to compare the achieved vault using a manufacturer’s nomogram and the predicted vault using the currently available prediction formulas after posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens (EVO Implantable Collamer Lens; ICL, STAAR Surgical) implantation. We included 200 eyes of 100 consecutive patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 34.3 ± 7.8 years) undergoing ICL implantation with a central hole. Three months postoperatively, we quantitatively measured the actual vault, and we compared it with the predicted vault using anterior segment optical coherence tomography (CASIA 2, Tomey). The agreement rate of the recommended ICL size using the manufacturer’s nomogram, the NK formula, and the KS formula was 50.0%. The achieved vault was 477.1 ± 263.7 µm, which was significantly smaller than the predicted vaults of 551.2 ± 335.1 and 606.4 ± 212.2 µm, using the NK and KS formulas, respectively (Dunnett test, p = 0.014, p < 0.001). The achieved vault was not significantly different from the predicted vault using the NK or KS formula (p = 0.386, p = 0.157) when selecting a 12.1 mm ICL size. It was not significantly different from the predicted vault using the NK formula (p = 0.962), but it was significantly smaller than that using the KS formula (p = 0.033) when selecting a 12.6 mm size. It was significantly smaller than the predicted vault using the NK and KS formulas (p < 0.001) when selecting 13.2 mm size. The total agreement rate of the recommended ICL size was approximately 50%. The predicted ICL vault tended to overestimate the actual ICL vault, especially when selecting a larger ICL size.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7765914
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77659142020-12-28 Comparison of Phakic Intraocular Lens Vault Using Conventional Nomogram and Prediction Formulas Ando, Wakako Kamiya, Kazutaka Hayakawa, Hideki Takahashi, Masahide Shoji, Nobuyuki J Clin Med Article This study aimed to compare the achieved vault using a manufacturer’s nomogram and the predicted vault using the currently available prediction formulas after posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens (EVO Implantable Collamer Lens; ICL, STAAR Surgical) implantation. We included 200 eyes of 100 consecutive patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 34.3 ± 7.8 years) undergoing ICL implantation with a central hole. Three months postoperatively, we quantitatively measured the actual vault, and we compared it with the predicted vault using anterior segment optical coherence tomography (CASIA 2, Tomey). The agreement rate of the recommended ICL size using the manufacturer’s nomogram, the NK formula, and the KS formula was 50.0%. The achieved vault was 477.1 ± 263.7 µm, which was significantly smaller than the predicted vaults of 551.2 ± 335.1 and 606.4 ± 212.2 µm, using the NK and KS formulas, respectively (Dunnett test, p = 0.014, p < 0.001). The achieved vault was not significantly different from the predicted vault using the NK or KS formula (p = 0.386, p = 0.157) when selecting a 12.1 mm ICL size. It was not significantly different from the predicted vault using the NK formula (p = 0.962), but it was significantly smaller than that using the KS formula (p = 0.033) when selecting a 12.6 mm size. It was significantly smaller than the predicted vault using the NK and KS formulas (p < 0.001) when selecting 13.2 mm size. The total agreement rate of the recommended ICL size was approximately 50%. The predicted ICL vault tended to overestimate the actual ICL vault, especially when selecting a larger ICL size. MDPI 2020-12-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7765914/ /pubmed/33352917 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9124090 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Ando, Wakako
Kamiya, Kazutaka
Hayakawa, Hideki
Takahashi, Masahide
Shoji, Nobuyuki
Comparison of Phakic Intraocular Lens Vault Using Conventional Nomogram and Prediction Formulas
title Comparison of Phakic Intraocular Lens Vault Using Conventional Nomogram and Prediction Formulas
title_full Comparison of Phakic Intraocular Lens Vault Using Conventional Nomogram and Prediction Formulas
title_fullStr Comparison of Phakic Intraocular Lens Vault Using Conventional Nomogram and Prediction Formulas
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Phakic Intraocular Lens Vault Using Conventional Nomogram and Prediction Formulas
title_short Comparison of Phakic Intraocular Lens Vault Using Conventional Nomogram and Prediction Formulas
title_sort comparison of phakic intraocular lens vault using conventional nomogram and prediction formulas
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7765914/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33352917
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9124090
work_keys_str_mv AT andowakako comparisonofphakicintraocularlensvaultusingconventionalnomogramandpredictionformulas
AT kamiyakazutaka comparisonofphakicintraocularlensvaultusingconventionalnomogramandpredictionformulas
AT hayakawahideki comparisonofphakicintraocularlensvaultusingconventionalnomogramandpredictionformulas
AT takahashimasahide comparisonofphakicintraocularlensvaultusingconventionalnomogramandpredictionformulas
AT shojinobuyuki comparisonofphakicintraocularlensvaultusingconventionalnomogramandpredictionformulas