2022
DOI: 10.1007/s40123-022-00569-w
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparisons of Using Cycloplegic Biometry Versus Non-cycloplegic Biometry in the Calculation of the Cycloplegic Refractive Lens Powers

Abstract: Introduction This study investigated the difference between the calculation of cycloplegic crystalline lens power (LP) using non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic biometry data in children, and associated factors were explored. Methods A total of 821 children were enrolled and only right eye was analyzed. The corneal radii (CR), corneal power (CP), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), and axial length (AL) before and after cycloplegia were obtained using IOLMast… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
1

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 29 publications
0
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In both keratoconus patients and controls, a decrease in lens thickness was observed following cycloplegia, indicating a similar response to cycloplegia in both groups (27). This finding contradicted some studies reporting differences in lens thickness between keratoconus patients and emmetropes, potentially attributable to factors like age and measurement devices used (28). The similarity in age inclusion criteria between this study and that by Polat N could explain the congruence in their results.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 66%
“…In both keratoconus patients and controls, a decrease in lens thickness was observed following cycloplegia, indicating a similar response to cycloplegia in both groups (27). This finding contradicted some studies reporting differences in lens thickness between keratoconus patients and emmetropes, potentially attributable to factors like age and measurement devices used (28). The similarity in age inclusion criteria between this study and that by Polat N could explain the congruence in their results.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 66%