Cargando…

Comparison of Barrett and Emmetropia Verifying Optical Toric Calculators

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the Barrett (BTC) and Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) Toric Calculators’ performance with regards to prediction of residual post-operative astigmatism after cataract surgery. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of de-identified data that was co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pantanelli, Seth M, Sun, Ashley, Kansara, Neal, Smits, Gerard
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8800868/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35115757
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S346925
_version_ 1784642321422221312
author Pantanelli, Seth M
Sun, Ashley
Kansara, Neal
Smits, Gerard
author_facet Pantanelli, Seth M
Sun, Ashley
Kansara, Neal
Smits, Gerard
author_sort Pantanelli, Seth M
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the Barrett (BTC) and Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) Toric Calculators’ performance with regards to prediction of residual post-operative astigmatism after cataract surgery. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of de-identified data that was collected as part of a prospective multicenter clinical trial in which 109 eyes from 109 patients were implanted with a monofocal toric intraocular lens (IOL). Post-operative biometry was used to calculate the predicted post-operative residual astigmatism for each eye using the two different calculators. The vector difference between the actual and predicted residual astigmatism was calculated. RESULTS: The mean absolute astigmatism prediction errors were 0.59 ± 0.38 D and 0.59 ± 0.36 D for the BTC and EVO calculators, respectively (p = 0.98). The centroid of the prediction errors were 0.18 D @ 89° ± 0.68 D and 0.20 D @ 89° ± 0.66 D, respectively (p = 0.21). The proportion of eyes in which the astigmatism prediction error was ≤0.5 D was 50% for BTC and 46% for EVO (p = 0.28). The proportion of eyes in which the post-operative astigmatism orientation was correctly predicted as being against-the-rule, with-the-rule, or oblique was 81% for BTC and 77% for EVO (p = 0.15). CONCLUSION: The Barrett and Emmetropia Verifying Optical Toric Calculators had similar performance with regards to their astigmatism prediction accuracy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8800868
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88008682022-02-02 Comparison of Barrett and Emmetropia Verifying Optical Toric Calculators Pantanelli, Seth M Sun, Ashley Kansara, Neal Smits, Gerard Clin Ophthalmol Original Research PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the Barrett (BTC) and Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) Toric Calculators’ performance with regards to prediction of residual post-operative astigmatism after cataract surgery. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of de-identified data that was collected as part of a prospective multicenter clinical trial in which 109 eyes from 109 patients were implanted with a monofocal toric intraocular lens (IOL). Post-operative biometry was used to calculate the predicted post-operative residual astigmatism for each eye using the two different calculators. The vector difference between the actual and predicted residual astigmatism was calculated. RESULTS: The mean absolute astigmatism prediction errors were 0.59 ± 0.38 D and 0.59 ± 0.36 D for the BTC and EVO calculators, respectively (p = 0.98). The centroid of the prediction errors were 0.18 D @ 89° ± 0.68 D and 0.20 D @ 89° ± 0.66 D, respectively (p = 0.21). The proportion of eyes in which the astigmatism prediction error was ≤0.5 D was 50% for BTC and 46% for EVO (p = 0.28). The proportion of eyes in which the post-operative astigmatism orientation was correctly predicted as being against-the-rule, with-the-rule, or oblique was 81% for BTC and 77% for EVO (p = 0.15). CONCLUSION: The Barrett and Emmetropia Verifying Optical Toric Calculators had similar performance with regards to their astigmatism prediction accuracy. Dove 2022-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8800868/ /pubmed/35115757 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S346925 Text en © 2022 Pantanelli et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Pantanelli, Seth M
Sun, Ashley
Kansara, Neal
Smits, Gerard
Comparison of Barrett and Emmetropia Verifying Optical Toric Calculators
title Comparison of Barrett and Emmetropia Verifying Optical Toric Calculators
title_full Comparison of Barrett and Emmetropia Verifying Optical Toric Calculators
title_fullStr Comparison of Barrett and Emmetropia Verifying Optical Toric Calculators
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Barrett and Emmetropia Verifying Optical Toric Calculators
title_short Comparison of Barrett and Emmetropia Verifying Optical Toric Calculators
title_sort comparison of barrett and emmetropia verifying optical toric calculators
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8800868/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35115757
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S346925
work_keys_str_mv AT pantanellisethm comparisonofbarrettandemmetropiaverifyingopticaltoriccalculators
AT sunashley comparisonofbarrettandemmetropiaverifyingopticaltoriccalculators
AT kansaraneal comparisonofbarrettandemmetropiaverifyingopticaltoriccalculators
AT smitsgerard comparisonofbarrettandemmetropiaverifyingopticaltoriccalculators