English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

【Purpose】To compare the refractive prediction errors of three formulas for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation with a new swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) biometer (ARGOS) that uses individual refractive index for axial length measurement. 【Patients and Methods】Subjects were 144 eyes of 144 patients who had undergone cataract surgery with no intraor postoperative complications. Using measurements obtained by the ARGOS, the refractive prediction errors of the SRK/T, Haigis, and Barrett Universal II (BU II) formulas were compared at postoperative 3 months. The IOL constants applied were optimized by the IOLMaster 500. 【Results】Mean refractive prediction errors (average ± standard deviation) using the SRK/T, Haigis and BUIIformulas were -0.22 ± 0.42 diopters (D), -0.08 ± 0.37 D, and -0.12 ± 0.34 D, respectively. Significant differences were seen among the three formulas (p = 0.0071). The refractive prediction error with the Haigis formula was significantly smaller than that with the SRK/T formula (p = 0.0059). The median absolute refractive prediction errors (MedAE) for the SRK/T was 0.32 D, for Haigis was 0.25 D and for BUIIformulas was 0.23 D. The refractive prediction error with the BU II was significantly smaller than those with the SRK/T (p = 0.0032) and Haigis (p = 0.04) formulas. No significant difference in the percentage of eyes with a postoperative prediction error within ±0.5 D (p = 0.077) or ±1.0 D (p = 0.289) was seen among the 3 formulas. In eyes with long axial length, the refractive prediction error with the Haigis formula (-0.12 D) was significantly smaller (p = 0.02) than those with the SRK/T (-0.36 D, p = 0.0279) and the BUII(-0.24 D, p = 0.0061). 【Conclusion】With the ARGOS that uses the individual refractive index for axial length, all three formulas for IOL power calculation showed relatively small prediction errors in this study. However, a myopic shift in eyes with long axial length should be considered.

Comparison of Three Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas Using a New Swept Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometer