{"title":"ESCRS眼内透镜功率计算器所含公式的性能。","authors":"Janusz Skrzypecki, Douglas D Koch, Li Wang","doi":"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001531","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the refractive prediction errors (PEs) of formulas included in the ESCRS intraocular lens (IOL) power calculator to aid in informed decisions on IOL power selection based on the output of this tool.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Cullen Eye Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective case-series.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>748 eyes of 748 patients after implantation of 1 of 3 lenses were included, single-piece: the SN60WF, PCB00/ZCB00 and 3-piece: MA60MA. IOL constants recommended by the calculator were used for the study. We performed analysis for the whole dataset, short (<22 mm) and long eyes (>25 mm) as well as in subgroups based on the type of the implanted IOL. SD and root mean square absolute error (RMSAE) were selected as the primary endpoints.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cooke K6 had the lowest SD of PEs in the whole dataset ( P < .05) when compared with Barrett, EVO, and Hoffer QST. In the subgroup of long eyes, the Kane formula had the lowest RMSAE ( P < .05) when compared with Barrett and EVO. No significant differences in primary endpoints for implantation of the 3 types of IOLs were found. However, the median absolute error after implantation of the MA60MA was significantly higher for Hoffer QST than for all other formulas except for Pearl-DGS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant differences in the performance of formulas included in the calculator were found. In the whole dataset, Cooke K6 had the lowest SD of PEs among the analyzed formulas.</p>","PeriodicalId":15214,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","volume":" ","pages":"1224-1229"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11556801/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance of formulas included in the ESCRS intraocular lens power calculator.\",\"authors\":\"Janusz Skrzypecki, Douglas D Koch, Li Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001531\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the refractive prediction errors (PEs) of formulas included in the ESCRS intraocular lens (IOL) power calculator to aid in informed decisions on IOL power selection based on the output of this tool.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Cullen Eye Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective case-series.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>748 eyes of 748 patients after implantation of 1 of 3 lenses were included, single-piece: the SN60WF, PCB00/ZCB00 and 3-piece: MA60MA. IOL constants recommended by the calculator were used for the study. We performed analysis for the whole dataset, short (<22 mm) and long eyes (>25 mm) as well as in subgroups based on the type of the implanted IOL. SD and root mean square absolute error (RMSAE) were selected as the primary endpoints.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cooke K6 had the lowest SD of PEs in the whole dataset ( P < .05) when compared with Barrett, EVO, and Hoffer QST. In the subgroup of long eyes, the Kane formula had the lowest RMSAE ( P < .05) when compared with Barrett and EVO. No significant differences in primary endpoints for implantation of the 3 types of IOLs were found. However, the median absolute error after implantation of the MA60MA was significantly higher for Hoffer QST than for all other formulas except for Pearl-DGS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant differences in the performance of formulas included in the calculator were found. In the whole dataset, Cooke K6 had the lowest SD of PEs among the analyzed formulas.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1224-1229\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11556801/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001531\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001531","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Performance of formulas included in the ESCRS intraocular lens power calculator.
Purpose: To compare the refractive prediction errors (PEs) of formulas included in the ESCRS intraocular lens (IOL) power calculator to aid in informed decisions on IOL power selection based on the output of this tool.
Setting: Cullen Eye Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Design: Retrospective case-series.
Methods: 748 eyes of 748 patients after implantation of 1 of 3 lenses were included, single-piece: the SN60WF, PCB00/ZCB00 and 3-piece: MA60MA. IOL constants recommended by the calculator were used for the study. We performed analysis for the whole dataset, short (<22 mm) and long eyes (>25 mm) as well as in subgroups based on the type of the implanted IOL. SD and root mean square absolute error (RMSAE) were selected as the primary endpoints.
Results: Cooke K6 had the lowest SD of PEs in the whole dataset ( P < .05) when compared with Barrett, EVO, and Hoffer QST. In the subgroup of long eyes, the Kane formula had the lowest RMSAE ( P < .05) when compared with Barrett and EVO. No significant differences in primary endpoints for implantation of the 3 types of IOLs were found. However, the median absolute error after implantation of the MA60MA was significantly higher for Hoffer QST than for all other formulas except for Pearl-DGS.
Conclusions: Significant differences in the performance of formulas included in the calculator were found. In the whole dataset, Cooke K6 had the lowest SD of PEs among the analyzed formulas.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery (JCRS), a preeminent peer-reviewed monthly ophthalmology publication, is the official journal of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) and the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS).
JCRS publishes high quality articles on all aspects of anterior segment surgery. In addition to original clinical studies, the journal features a consultation section, practical techniques, important cases, and reviews as well as basic science articles.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
