Literature DB >> 30851805

A comparison of two methods to calculate axial length.

David L Cooke1, Timothy L Cooke2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare prediction accuracy with the axial length (AL) calculation method of the Lenstar biometer (traditional AL) and that of the ARGOS biometer (sum-of-segments AL).
SETTING: Private practice clinic.
DESIGN: Comparative case series. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Mean absolute error (MAE).
METHODS: Predictions were developed for nine formulas, grouping them into those derived with ultrasound (US) (SRK/T, Holladay 1 and 2, Hoffer Q, Haigis) and those derived with optical biometry (Barrett, OKULIX, Olsen from PhacoOptics, and Olsen from Lenstar). Formulas were ranked by MAE using sum-of-segments AL and traditional AL, in short eyes (traditional AL <22.0 mm), long eyes (traditional AL >26.0 mm), and all eyes.
RESULTS: The study comprised 1442 eyes (54 short eyes and 67 long eyes) of 1070 patients. The best-ranking formula for long eyes was Haigis using sum-of-segments AL. For short eyes and for all eyes, OKULIX using sum-of-segments AL was best. Using sum-of-segments AL instead of traditional AL, Holladay 2 improved the most; Olsen from PhacoOptics worsened the most.
CONCLUSIONS: Some biometers used traditional AL, and at least one used sum-of-segments AL. Formula accuracy varied depending on how various commercial biometers internally calculate AL. Using sum-of-segments AL instead of traditional AL improved predictions for formulas designed on US data (SRK/T, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Hoffer Q, and Haigis), although it worsened the Barrett and Olsen formulas. OKULIX was generally improved with sum-of-segments AL. When ranking by MAE, OKULIX ranked first.
Copyright © 2018 ASCRS and ESCRS. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30851805     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2018.10.039

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg        ISSN: 0886-3350            Impact factor:   3.351


  10 in total

1.  Optical Coherence Tomography: Critical Tool to Manage Expectations after Cataract Extraction.

Authors:  Raquel Goldhardt; Bradley Simon Rosen
Journal:  Curr Ophthalmol Rep       Date:  2020-06-06

2.  Validating e-norms methodology in ophthalmic biometry.

Authors:  H John Shammas; Joe F Jabre
Journal:  BMJ Open Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-09-24

3.  [Back-calculation of the keratometer index-Which value would have been correct in cataract surgery?]

Authors:  Achim Langenbucher; Philipp Eberwein; Ekkehard Fabian; Nóra Szentmáry; Johannes Weisensee
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 1.059

4.  Effects on IOL Power Calculation and Expected Clinical Outcomes of Axial Length Measurements Based on Multiple vs Single Refractive Indices.

Authors:  H John Shammas; Maya C Shammas; Renu V Jivrajka; David L Cooke; Richard Potvin
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-06-04

5.  IOL Formula Constants: Strategies for Optimization and Defining Standards for Presenting Data.

Authors:  Achim Langenbucher; Nóra Szentmáry; Alan Cayless; Michael Müller; Timo Eppig; Simon Schröder; Ekkehart Fabian
Journal:  Ophthalmic Res       Date:  2021-02-02       Impact factor: 2.892

6.  Axial Length Change in Pseudophakic Eyes Measured by IOLMaster 700.

Authors:  Jiaqing Zhang; Zhenzhen Liu; Xiaozhang Qiu; Ling Jin; Lanhua Wang; Guangming Jin; Wei Wang; Xuhua Tan; Lixia Luo; Yizhi Liu
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 3.283

7.  Strategies for formula constant optimisation for intraocular lens power calculation.

Authors:  Achim Langenbucher; Nóra Szentmáry; Alan Cayless; Jascha Wendelstein; Peter Hoffmann
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-05-05       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Comparison of Formula-Specific Factors and Artificial Intelligence Formulas with Axial Length Adjustments in Bilateral Cataract Patients with Long Axial Length.

Authors:  Chuang Li; Mingwei Wang; Rui Feng; Feiyan Liang; Xialin Liu; Chang He; Shuxin Fan
Journal:  Ophthalmol Ther       Date:  2022-08-02

9.  Presbyopia-correcting performance and subjective outcomes of a trifocal intraocular lens in eyes with different axial lengths: A prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Tong Sun; Yiyun Liu; Xiaorui Zhao; Yufei Gao; Tingting Yang; Qianqian Lan; Chuhao Tang; Hong Qi
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-09-02

10.  The Castrop formula for calculation of toric intraocular lenses.

Authors:  Achim Langenbucher; Nóra Szentmáry; Alan Cayless; Johannes Weisensee; Jascha Wendelstein; Peter Hoffmann
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 3.117

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.