Ming-Hui Deng1,2,3, Xiao-Gang Wang4, Song Chen1,2, Xue-Feng Shi1,2. 1. Clinical College of Ophthalmology, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin 300070, China. 2. Tianjin Key Lab of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Tianjin Eye Institute, Tianjin Eye Hospital, Tianjin 300020, China. 3. Department of Cataract, Linfen Yaodu Eye Hospital, Linfen 042000, Shanxi Province, China. 4. Department of Cataract, Shanxi Eye Hospital Affiliated to Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030002, Shanxi Province, China.
Abstract
AIM: To investigate the binocular intraocular lens (IOL) power difference in eyes with short, normal, and long axial lengths (AL) using Lenstar LS 900 optical biometry. METHODS: A total of 716 (1432 eyes) participants were included. The groups were categorized into short (group A: AL<22 mm), normal (group B: 22 mm≤AL≤25 mm), and long AL groups (group C: AL>25 mm). The central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), AL, anterior corneal keratometry, white-to-white (WTW), pupil diameter (PD), as well as IOL power calculated using embedded Barrett formula were assessed. Bland-Altman plots were used to test the agreement of the binocular parameters. RESULTS: In group A, the CCT of the right eye was significantly thinner than that of the left eye (P=0.044) with a difference of -2±8 µm [95% limits of agreement (LoA), -17.8 to 13.2 µm]. For group B, the PD and IOL power in the right eye were significantly lower than those of the left eye (P=0.001, <0.001) with a difference of -0.05±0.32 mm (95%LoA, -0.68 to 0.58 mm) and -0.18±1.01 D (95%LoA, -2.2 to 1.8 D). The AL of right eye was longer than that of the left eye (P=0.002) with a difference of 0.04±0.25 mm (95%LoA, -0.45 to 0.52 mm). No significant difference was observed for all the binocular parameters in group C. The percentage of participants with binocular IOL power difference within ±0.5 D were 62% (31/50), 68.3% (339/496), and 38.8% (66/170) in groups A, B, and C, respectively. CONCLUSION: The binocular parameters related to IOL power are in good agreement, but the binocular IOL power difference of more than half of participants with long AL is more than 0.50 D. International Journal of Ophthalmology Press.
AIM: To investigate the binocular intraocular lens (IOL) power difference in eyes with short, normal, and long axial lengths (AL) using Lenstar LS 900 optical biometry. METHODS: A total of 716 (1432 eyes) participants were included. The groups were categorized into short (group A: AL<22 mm), normal (group B: 22 mm≤AL≤25 mm), and long AL groups (group C: AL>25 mm). The central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), AL, anterior corneal keratometry, white-to-white (WTW), pupil diameter (PD), as well as IOL power calculated using embedded Barrett formula were assessed. Bland-Altman plots were used to test the agreement of the binocular parameters. RESULTS: In group A, the CCT of the right eye was significantly thinner than that of the left eye (P=0.044) with a difference of -2±8 µm [95% limits of agreement (LoA), -17.8 to 13.2 µm]. For group B, the PD and IOL power in the right eye were significantly lower than those of the left eye (P=0.001, <0.001) with a difference of -0.05±0.32 mm (95%LoA, -0.68 to 0.58 mm) and -0.18±1.01 D (95%LoA, -2.2 to 1.8 D). The AL of right eye was longer than that of the left eye (P=0.002) with a difference of 0.04±0.25 mm (95%LoA, -0.45 to 0.52 mm). No significant difference was observed for all the binocular parameters in group C. The percentage of participants with binocular IOL power difference within ±0.5 D were 62% (31/50), 68.3% (339/496), and 38.8% (66/170) in groups A, B, and C, respectively. CONCLUSION: The binocular parameters related to IOL power are in good agreement, but the binocular IOL power difference of more than half of participants with long AL is more than 0.50 D. International Journal of Ophthalmology Press.
Entities:
Keywords:
axial length; binocular difference; intraocular lens power
Authors: Henrique Aragão Arruda; Joana M Pereira; Arminda Neves; Maria João Vieira; Joana Martins; João C Sousa Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-01-14 Impact factor: 4.379