Literature DB >> 31992069

Accuracy of the Hill-radial basis function method and the Barrett Universal II formula.

Gabor Nemeth1, Laszlo Modis2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim was to assess the postoperative results of a biometric method using artificial intelligence (Hill-radial basis function 2.0), and data from a modern formula (Barrett Universal II) and the Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraft/Theoretical formula.
METHODS: Phacoemulsification and biconvex intraocular lens implantation were performed in 186 cataractous eyes. The diopters of intraocular lens were established with the Hill-radial basis function method, based on biometric data obtained using the Aladdin device. The required diopters of the intraocular lens were also calculated by the Barrett Universal II formula and with the Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraft/Theoretical formula. The differences between the manifest postoperative refractive errors and the planned refractive errors were calculated, as well as the percentage of eyes within ±0.5 D of the prediction error. The mean- and the median absolute refractive errors were also determined.
RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 70.13 years (SD = 10.67 years), and the mean axial length was 23.47 mm (range = 20.72-28.78 mm). The percentage of eyes within a prediction error of ±0.5 D was 83.62% using the Hill-radial basis function method, 79.66% with the Barrett Universal II formula, and 74.01% in the case of the Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraft/Theoretical formula. The mean- and the median absolute refractive errors were not statistically different.
CONCLUSION: Clinical success was the highest when using the biometric method, based on pattern recognition. The results obtained using Barrett Universal II came a close second. Both methods performed better compared to a traditionally used formula.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Barrett Universal II formula; Hill–radial basis function method; Sanders–Retzlaff–Kraft/Theoretical formula; biometry; effective lens position

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31992069     DOI: 10.1177/1120672120902952

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 1120-6721            Impact factor:   2.597


  3 in total

1.  The binocular intraocular lens power difference in eyes with different axial lengths.

Authors:  Ming-Hui Deng; Xiao-Gang Wang; Song Chen; Xue-Feng Shi
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-06-18       Impact factor: 1.645

2.  Influence of the invariant refraction assumption in studies of formulas for monofocal and multifocal intraocular lens power calculation.

Authors:  Joaquín Fernández; Manuel Rodríguez-Vallejo; Javier Martínez; Noemi Burguera; David Piñero
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-02-08       Impact factor: 2.029

3.  Determining the Theoretical Effective Lens Position of Thick Intraocular Lenses for Machine Learning-Based IOL Power Calculation and Simulation.

Authors:  Damien Gatinel; Guillaume Debellemanière; Alain Saad; Mathieu Dubois; Radhika Rampat
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 3.283

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.