Comparison of Toric Intraocular Lens Axis Accuracy between Optical Biometry and Dual Scheimpflug Topography.

Seonghwan Kim, Yengwoo Son, Joon Young Hyon
{"title":"Comparison of Toric Intraocular Lens Axis Accuracy between Optical Biometry and Dual Scheimpflug Topography.","authors":"Seonghwan Kim, Yengwoo Son, Joon Young Hyon","doi":"10.3341/kjo.2024.0117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the accuracy of toric intraocular lens (IOL) axis prediction between two preoperative measurement devices: the optical biometry (IOLMaster 500 or 700) and the dual Scheimpflug topography (Galilei G4).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medical records of 64 eyes from 44 patients who underwent phacoemulsification and posterior chamber toric IOL (Zeiss AT TORBI 709M) implantation between July 2017 and January 2022 were reviewed. All patients underwent preoperative evaluation by optical biometry (IOLMaster 500 or IOLMaster 700) and Galilei G4. The gold-standard axis that minimizes astigmatism was calculated by the online Toric Results Analyzer postoperatively and compared to the preoperative toric IOL axis calculated by the Z CALC online IOL calculator using parameters from either IOLMaster or Galilei G4. The axis error (AE) and the absolute axis error (AAE) between the gold-standard axis and the preoperative calculated axis were analyzed to assess the accuracy of each device.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean flat keratometry (K) and steep K were 42.99 diopter (D) and 45.61 D in IOLMaster, and 43.04 D and 45.51 D in Galilei G4, which did not show any significant difference. Mean keratometric astigmatism (KA) was 2.62 D in IOLMaster and 2.46 D in Galilei G4, which also did not show any statistical difference. KA axis did not show any significant difference between IOLMaster and Galilei G4. The mean AE and AAE were 0.19° and 6.84° by IOLMaster, and -0.80° and 7.98° by Galilei G4. The AE and AAE by IOLMaster did not show any significant difference compared to those of Galilei G4 (p=0.583, p=0.346, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study suggests that the Galilei G4 demonstrated a similar level of accuracy to the IOLMaster in predicting the toric IOL axis, based on the gold standard axis provided by the toric results analyzer.</p>","PeriodicalId":101356,"journal":{"name":"Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3341/kjo.2024.0117","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy of toric intraocular lens (IOL) axis prediction between two preoperative measurement devices: the optical biometry (IOLMaster 500 or 700) and the dual Scheimpflug topography (Galilei G4).

Methods: Medical records of 64 eyes from 44 patients who underwent phacoemulsification and posterior chamber toric IOL (Zeiss AT TORBI 709M) implantation between July 2017 and January 2022 were reviewed. All patients underwent preoperative evaluation by optical biometry (IOLMaster 500 or IOLMaster 700) and Galilei G4. The gold-standard axis that minimizes astigmatism was calculated by the online Toric Results Analyzer postoperatively and compared to the preoperative toric IOL axis calculated by the Z CALC online IOL calculator using parameters from either IOLMaster or Galilei G4. The axis error (AE) and the absolute axis error (AAE) between the gold-standard axis and the preoperative calculated axis were analyzed to assess the accuracy of each device.

Results: Mean flat keratometry (K) and steep K were 42.99 diopter (D) and 45.61 D in IOLMaster, and 43.04 D and 45.51 D in Galilei G4, which did not show any significant difference. Mean keratometric astigmatism (KA) was 2.62 D in IOLMaster and 2.46 D in Galilei G4, which also did not show any statistical difference. KA axis did not show any significant difference between IOLMaster and Galilei G4. The mean AE and AAE were 0.19° and 6.84° by IOLMaster, and -0.80° and 7.98° by Galilei G4. The AE and AAE by IOLMaster did not show any significant difference compared to those of Galilei G4 (p=0.583, p=0.346, respectively).

Conclusions: This study suggests that the Galilei G4 demonstrated a similar level of accuracy to the IOLMaster in predicting the toric IOL axis, based on the gold standard axis provided by the toric results analyzer.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
光学生物测量法与双图式地形测量法人工晶状体轴精度的比较。
目的:评价两种术前测量装置:光学生物计量仪(IOLMaster 500或700)和双Scheimpflug地形图仪(Galilei G4)对环形人工晶状体(IOL)轴预测的准确性。方法:回顾2017年7月至2022年1月44例超声乳化术合并后房型环形人工晶状体植入术患者64只眼的病历。所有患者术前进行光学生物测定(IOLMaster 500或IOLMaster 700)和Galilei G4评估。术后使用在线环面结果分析仪计算出最大限度减少散光的金标准轴,并与术前使用IOLMaster或Galilei G4参数使用Z CALC在线IOL计算器计算出的环面IOL轴进行比较。分析金标准轴与术前计算轴之间的轴误差(AE)和绝对轴误差(AAE),评估各装置的准确性。结果:IOLMaster的平均平角度数(K)和陡角度数(K)分别为42.99和45.61 D, Galilei G4的平均K为43.04和45.51 D,差异无统计学意义。IOLMaster组和Galilei G4组的平均角膜散光(KA)分别为2.62 D和2.46 D,差异无统计学意义。IOLMaster与Galilei G4的KA轴无显著性差异。IOLMaster的平均AE为0.19°和6.84°,Galilei G4的平均AE为-0.80°和7.98°。IOLMaster的AE和AAE与Galilei G4比较无显著差异(p=0.583, p=0.346)。结论:本研究表明,基于环面结果分析仪提供的金标准轴,Galilei G4在预测环面人工晶状体轴方面与IOLMaster具有相似的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Ocular Manifestations of Immune Reconstitution Inflammatory Syndrome in HIV after Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy: Clinical Use of CD8+ T cell. Comparison of Toric Intraocular Lens Axis Accuracy between Optical Biometry and Dual Scheimpflug Topography. Ocular Injuries in Patients with Old Blow-out Fractures Following Blunt Trauma. A Case of Bilateral Acute Angle Closure Glaucoma in a Patient with Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada Syndrome. A Case of Macular Serpiginous Choroidopathy with Secondary Choroidal Neovascularization.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1