$Lenstar LS 900 versus Pentacam-AXL: analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction$
Código QR

Lenstar LS 900 versus Pentacam-AXL: analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction

Abstract Analysis of refractive outcomes, using biometry data collected with a new biometer (Pentacam-AXL, OCULUS, Germany) and a reference biometer (Lenstar LS 900, HAAG-STREIT AG, Switzerland), in order to assess differences in the predicted and actual refraction using different formulas. Prospect...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Henrique Aragão Arruda, Joana M. Pereira, Arminda Neves, Maria João Vieira, Joana Martins, João C. Sousa
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/e85a9344fa1a4859b6d61fd50af9989f
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:e85a9344fa1a4859b6d61fd50af9989f
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:e85a9344fa1a4859b6d61fd50af9989f2021-12-02T14:12:08ZLenstar LS 900 versus Pentacam-AXL: analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction10.1038/s41598-021-81146-22045-2322https://doaj.org/article/e85a9344fa1a4859b6d61fd50af9989f2021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-81146-2https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract Analysis of refractive outcomes, using biometry data collected with a new biometer (Pentacam-AXL, OCULUS, Germany) and a reference biometer (Lenstar LS 900, HAAG-STREIT AG, Switzerland), in order to assess differences in the predicted and actual refraction using different formulas. Prospective, institutional study, in which intraocular lens (IOL) calculation was performed using the Haigis, SRK/T and Hoffer Q formulas with the two systems in patients undergoing cataract surgery between November 2016 and August 2017. Four to 6 weeks after surgery, the spherical equivalent (SE) was derived from objective refraction. Mean prediction error (PE), mean absolute error (MAE) and the median absolute error (MedAE) were calculated. The percentage of eyes within ± 0.25, ± 0.50, ± 1.00, and ± 2.00 D of MAE was determined. 104 eyes from 76 patients, 35 males (46.1%), underwent uneventful phacoemulsification with IOL implantation. Mean SE after surgery was − 0.29 ± 0.46 D. Mean prediction error (PE) using the SRK/T, Haigis and Hoffer Q formulas with the Lenstar was significantly different (p > 0.0001) from PE calculated with the Pentacam in all three formulas. Percentage of eyes within ± 0.25 D MAE were larger with the Lenstar device, using all three formulas. The difference between the actual refractive error and the predicted refractive error is consistently lower when using Lenstar. The Pentacam-AXL user should be alert to the critical necessity of constant optimization in order to obtain optimal refractive results.Henrique Aragão ArrudaJoana M. PereiraArminda NevesMaria João VieiraJoana MartinsJoão C. SousaNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 1-5 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Henrique Aragão Arruda Joana M. Pereira Arminda Neves Maria João Vieira Joana Martins João C. Sousa Lenstar LS 900 versus Pentacam-AXL: analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction
description	Abstract Analysis of refractive outcomes, using biometry data collected with a new biometer (Pentacam-AXL, OCULUS, Germany) and a reference biometer (Lenstar LS 900, HAAG-STREIT AG, Switzerland), in order to assess differences in the predicted and actual refraction using different formulas. Prospective, institutional study, in which intraocular lens (IOL) calculation was performed using the Haigis, SRK/T and Hoffer Q formulas with the two systems in patients undergoing cataract surgery between November 2016 and August 2017. Four to 6 weeks after surgery, the spherical equivalent (SE) was derived from objective refraction. Mean prediction error (PE), mean absolute error (MAE) and the median absolute error (MedAE) were calculated. The percentage of eyes within ± 0.25, ± 0.50, ± 1.00, and ± 2.00 D of MAE was determined. 104 eyes from 76 patients, 35 males (46.1%), underwent uneventful phacoemulsification with IOL implantation. Mean SE after surgery was − 0.29 ± 0.46 D. Mean prediction error (PE) using the SRK/T, Haigis and Hoffer Q formulas with the Lenstar was significantly different (p > 0.0001) from PE calculated with the Pentacam in all three formulas. Percentage of eyes within ± 0.25 D MAE were larger with the Lenstar device, using all three formulas. The difference between the actual refractive error and the predicted refractive error is consistently lower when using Lenstar. The Pentacam-AXL user should be alert to the critical necessity of constant optimization in order to obtain optimal refractive results.
format	article
author	Henrique Aragão Arruda Joana M. Pereira Arminda Neves Maria João Vieira Joana Martins João C. Sousa
author_facet	Henrique Aragão Arruda Joana M. Pereira Arminda Neves Maria João Vieira Joana Martins João C. Sousa
author_sort	Henrique Aragão Arruda
title	Lenstar LS 900 versus Pentacam-AXL: analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction
title_short	Lenstar LS 900 versus Pentacam-AXL: analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction
title_full	Lenstar LS 900 versus Pentacam-AXL: analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction
title_fullStr	Lenstar LS 900 versus Pentacam-AXL: analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction
title_full_unstemmed	Lenstar LS 900 versus Pentacam-AXL: analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction
title_sort	lenstar ls 900 versus pentacam-axl: analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction
publisher	Nature Portfolio
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/e85a9344fa1a4859b6d61fd50af9989f
work_keys_str_mv	AT henriquearagaoarruda lenstarls900versuspentacamaxlanalysisofrefractiveoutcomesandpredictedrefraction AT joanampereira lenstarls900versuspentacamaxlanalysisofrefractiveoutcomesandpredictedrefraction AT armindaneves lenstarls900versuspentacamaxlanalysisofrefractiveoutcomesandpredictedrefraction AT mariajoaovieira lenstarls900versuspentacamaxlanalysisofrefractiveoutcomesandpredictedrefraction AT joanamartins lenstarls900versuspentacamaxlanalysisofrefractiveoutcomesandpredictedrefraction AT joaocsousa lenstarls900versuspentacamaxlanalysisofrefractiveoutcomesandpredictedrefraction
_version_	1718391819012669440

Lenstar LS 900 versus Pentacam-AXL: analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction

Ejemplares similares