Cargando…

Ray Tracing versus Thin-Lens Formulas for IOL Power Calculation Using Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometry

PURPOSE: To evaluate the ray tracing method's accuracy employing Okulix ray tracing software and thin-lens formulas to calculate intraocular lens (IOL) power using a swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) biometer (OA2000). METHODS: A total of 188 eyes from 180 patients were include...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ghaffari, Reza, Abdi, Parisa, Moghaddasi, Alireza, Heidarzadeh, Somayeh, Ghahvhechian, Hossein, Kasiri, Maryam
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PUBLISHED BY KNOWLEDGE E 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9185206/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35765642
http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/jovr.v17i2.10788
_version_ 1784724666761347072
author Ghaffari, Reza
Abdi, Parisa
Moghaddasi, Alireza
Heidarzadeh, Somayeh
Ghahvhechian, Hossein
Kasiri, Maryam
author_facet Ghaffari, Reza
Abdi, Parisa
Moghaddasi, Alireza
Heidarzadeh, Somayeh
Ghahvhechian, Hossein
Kasiri, Maryam
author_sort Ghaffari, Reza
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To evaluate the ray tracing method's accuracy employing Okulix ray tracing software and thin-lens formulas to calculate intraocular lens (IOL) power using a swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) biometer (OA2000). METHODS: A total of 188 eyes from 180 patients were included in this study. An OA-2000 optical biometer was used to collect biometric data. The predicted postoperative refraction based on thin-lens formulas including SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and Haigis formulas and the ray tracing method utilizing the OKULIX software was determined for each patient. To compare the accuracy of approaches, the prediction error and the absolute prediction error were determined. RESULTS: The mean axial length (AL) was 23.66 mm (range: 19–35). In subgroup analysis based on AL, in all ranges of ALs the ray tracing method had the lowest mean absolute error (0.56), the lowest standard deviation (SD; 0.55), and the greatest proportion of patients within 1 diopter of predicted refraction (87.43%) and the lowest absolute prediction error compared to the other formulas (except to SRK/T) in the AL range between 22 and 24 mm (all P [Formula: see text] 0.05). In addition, the OKULIX and Haigis formulas had the least variance (variability) in the prediction error in different ranges of AL. CONCLUSION: The ray tracing method had the lowest mean absolute error, the lowest standard deviation, and the greatest proportion of patients within 1 diopter of predicted refraction. So, the OKULIX software in combination with SS-OCT biometry (OA2000) performed on par with the third-generation and Haigis formulas, notwithstanding the potential for increased accuracy in the normal range and more consistent results in different ranges of AL.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9185206
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher PUBLISHED BY KNOWLEDGE E
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91852062022-06-27 Ray Tracing versus Thin-Lens Formulas for IOL Power Calculation Using Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometry Ghaffari, Reza Abdi, Parisa Moghaddasi, Alireza Heidarzadeh, Somayeh Ghahvhechian, Hossein Kasiri, Maryam J Ophthalmic Vis Res Original Article PURPOSE: To evaluate the ray tracing method's accuracy employing Okulix ray tracing software and thin-lens formulas to calculate intraocular lens (IOL) power using a swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) biometer (OA2000). METHODS: A total of 188 eyes from 180 patients were included in this study. An OA-2000 optical biometer was used to collect biometric data. The predicted postoperative refraction based on thin-lens formulas including SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and Haigis formulas and the ray tracing method utilizing the OKULIX software was determined for each patient. To compare the accuracy of approaches, the prediction error and the absolute prediction error were determined. RESULTS: The mean axial length (AL) was 23.66 mm (range: 19–35). In subgroup analysis based on AL, in all ranges of ALs the ray tracing method had the lowest mean absolute error (0.56), the lowest standard deviation (SD; 0.55), and the greatest proportion of patients within 1 diopter of predicted refraction (87.43%) and the lowest absolute prediction error compared to the other formulas (except to SRK/T) in the AL range between 22 and 24 mm (all P [Formula: see text] 0.05). In addition, the OKULIX and Haigis formulas had the least variance (variability) in the prediction error in different ranges of AL. CONCLUSION: The ray tracing method had the lowest mean absolute error, the lowest standard deviation, and the greatest proportion of patients within 1 diopter of predicted refraction. So, the OKULIX software in combination with SS-OCT biometry (OA2000) performed on par with the third-generation and Haigis formulas, notwithstanding the potential for increased accuracy in the normal range and more consistent results in different ranges of AL. PUBLISHED BY KNOWLEDGE E 2022-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9185206/ /pubmed/35765642 http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/jovr.v17i2.10788 Text en Copyright © 2022 Ghaffari et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Ghaffari, Reza
Abdi, Parisa
Moghaddasi, Alireza
Heidarzadeh, Somayeh
Ghahvhechian, Hossein
Kasiri, Maryam
Ray Tracing versus Thin-Lens Formulas for IOL Power Calculation Using Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometry
title Ray Tracing versus Thin-Lens Formulas for IOL Power Calculation Using Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometry
title_full Ray Tracing versus Thin-Lens Formulas for IOL Power Calculation Using Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometry
title_fullStr Ray Tracing versus Thin-Lens Formulas for IOL Power Calculation Using Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometry
title_full_unstemmed Ray Tracing versus Thin-Lens Formulas for IOL Power Calculation Using Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometry
title_short Ray Tracing versus Thin-Lens Formulas for IOL Power Calculation Using Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometry
title_sort ray tracing versus thin-lens formulas for iol power calculation using swept-source optical coherence tomography biometry
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9185206/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35765642
http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/jovr.v17i2.10788
work_keys_str_mv AT ghaffarireza raytracingversusthinlensformulasforiolpowercalculationusingsweptsourceopticalcoherencetomographybiometry
AT abdiparisa raytracingversusthinlensformulasforiolpowercalculationusingsweptsourceopticalcoherencetomographybiometry
AT moghaddasialireza raytracingversusthinlensformulasforiolpowercalculationusingsweptsourceopticalcoherencetomographybiometry
AT heidarzadehsomayeh raytracingversusthinlensformulasforiolpowercalculationusingsweptsourceopticalcoherencetomographybiometry
AT ghahvhechianhossein raytracingversusthinlensformulasforiolpowercalculationusingsweptsourceopticalcoherencetomographybiometry
AT kasirimaryam raytracingversusthinlensformulasforiolpowercalculationusingsweptsourceopticalcoherencetomographybiometry