A large retrospective database analysis comparing outcomes of intraoperative aberrometry with conventional preoperative planning

2020

Preprint

Background : To find agreement between the calculated intraocular lens (IOL) power from using the SRK/T based preoperative biometry and the intraoperative wavefront aberrometry (ORA ® ) in Thai cataract patients, and to compare the accuracy of each method with the postoperative refraction results. Methods : Eyes that underwent cataract surgery with monofocal or multifocal IOL implantation were enrolled in this prospective study. All eye biometry was measured preoperatively and the ORA intraoperatively. The SRK/T suggested IOL from the preoperative biometry was chosen in all cases. The suggested power and the estimated refraction (EST) from both devices were collected. Bland Altman analysis was used to find the agreement between them. The predicted EST of implanted IOL from both devices were compared with the one-month postoperative SE. Results : The study comprised 97 eyes (79 patients). Of these, 38 eyes (39.2%) had the same suggested IOL power, 36 eyes (37.1%) were within ±0.5D, 20 eyes (20.6%) were within ±1.0D and 3 eyes were beyond ±1.0D. Bland-Altman analysis found the mean difference between IOL power calculated from both devices was 0.39 with LoA of -0.54 to 1.31. The correlation was 98.50% (95%CI 98%- 99.10%). In the same suggested IOL power group, the median difference of EST by preoperative biometry and ORA compared with one-month postoperative SE were -0.08 (95%CI: -0.08, 1.11), and -0.14 (95%CI: -0.88, 1.2), respectively. Conclusions :The ORA and preoperative biometry results were in concordance with each other. The result of preoperative biometry was more accurate than ORA in this study. Trial Registration: The clinical trial registration number: TCTR20171005001 Registration Date October 3 rd , 2017 First Enrollment November 1 st , 2017

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 62%

Comparison of IOL Power Calculated by Preoperative Biometry versus Intraoperative Wavefront Aberrometry in Thai Cataract Patients.

2020

Preprint

“…And the absolute median prediction error was lower than the preoperative calculation, 0.24 D versus 0.29 D ( p< 0.0001). 22 In our study, however, there were 77 % of the subjects who achieved visual acuity of 20/20. Although it was statistically signi cant with the median difference of were -0.08 and -0.14 respectively.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 62%

Comparison of IOL Power Calculated by Preoperative Biometry versus Intraoperative Wavefront Aberrometry in Thai Cataract Patients.

2020

Preprint

Background: To find agreement between the calculated intraocular lens (IOL) power from using the SRK/T based preoperative biometry and the intraoperative wavefront aberrometry (ORA®) in Thai cataract patients, and to compare the accuracy of each method with the postoperative refraction results.Methods: Eyes that underwent cataract surgery with monofocal or multifocal IOL implantation were enrolled in this prospective study. All eye biometry was measured preoperatively and the ORA intraoperatively. The SRK/T suggested IOL from the preoperative biometry was chosen in all cases. The suggested power and the estimated refraction (EST) from both devices were collected. Bland Altman analysis was used to find the agreement between them. The predicted EST of implanted IOL from both devices were compared with the one-month postoperative SE. Results: The study comprised 97 eyes (79 patients). Of these, 38 eyes (39.2%) had the same suggested IOL power, 36 eyes (37.1%) were within ±0.5D, 20 eyes (20.6%) were within ±1.0D and 3 eyes were beyond ±1.0D. Bland-Altman analysis found the mean difference between IOL power calculated from both devices was 0.39 with LoA of -0.54 to 1.31. The correlation was 98.50% (95%CI 98%- 99.10%). In the same suggested IOL power group, the median difference of EST by preoperative biometry and ORA compared with one-month postoperative SE were -0.08 (95%CI: -0.08, 1.11), and -0.14 (95%CI: -0.88, 1.2), respectively. Conclusions:The ORA and preoperative biometry results were in concordance with each other. The result of preoperative biometry was more accurate than ORA in this study. Trial Registration: The thai clinical trial registration number: TCTR20171005001Registration Date: October 3rd, 2017First Enrollment: November 10th, 2017

“…And the absolute median prediction error was lower than the preoperative calculation, 0.24 D versus 0.29 D ( p< 0.0001). 22 In our study, however, there were 77 % of the subjects who achieved uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20. Although it was statistically significant with the median difference of were -0.08 and -0.14 respectively.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 61%

Comparison of IOL Power Calculated by Preoperative Biometry versus Intraoperative Wavefront Aberrometry in Thai Cataract Patients.

2020

Preprint

Background: As people now are expecting more precise and predictable results from cataract surgery. We need to find agreement between the calculated intraocular lens (IOL) power from using the SRK/T based preoperative biometry and the intraoperative wavefront aberrometry (ORA®) in Thai cataract patients. Methods: Eyes that underwent cataract surgery with monofocal or multifocal IOL implantation were enrolled in this prospective study. All eye biometry was measured preoperatively and the ORA intraoperatively. The SRK/T suggested IOL from the preoperative biometry was chosen in all cases. The suggested power and the estimated refraction (EST) from both devices were collected. Bland Altman analysis was used to find the agreement between them. The predicted EST of implanted IOL from both devices were compared with the one-month postoperative SE. Results: The study comprised 97 eyes (79 patients). Of these, 38 eyes (39.2%) had the same suggested IOL power, 36 eyes (37.1%) were within ±0.5D, 20 eyes (20.6%) were within ±1.0D and 3 eyes were beyond ±1.0D. Bland-Altman analysis found the mean difference between IOL power calculated from both devices was 0.39 with LoA of -0.54 to 1.31. The correlation was 98.50% (95%CI 98%- 99.10%). In the same suggested IOL power group, the median difference of EST by preoperative biometry and ORA compared with one-month postoperative SE were -0.08 (95%CI: -0.08, 1.11), and -0.14 (95%CI: -0.88, 1.2), respectively. Conclusions:The ORA and preoperative biometry results were in concordance with each other. The result of preoperative biometry was more accurate than ORA in this study.