$Comparing prediction accuracy between total keratometry and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation$
Código QR

Comparing prediction accuracy between total keratometry and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation

Abstract We aimed to compare refractive outcomes between total keratometry using a swept-source optical biometer and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. We included patients who underwent cataract surgery with refractive multif...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Ho Seok Chung, Jae Lim Chung, Young Jun Kim, Hun Lee, Jae Yong Kim, Hungwon Tchah
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/f03c87ac1b26488a9765a67cd7d7cce6
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:f03c87ac1b26488a9765a67cd7d7cce6
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:f03c87ac1b26488a9765a67cd7d7cce62021-12-02T17:37:29ZComparing prediction accuracy between total keratometry and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation10.1038/s41598-021-98491-x2045-2322https://doaj.org/article/f03c87ac1b26488a9765a67cd7d7cce62021-09-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-98491-xhttps://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract We aimed to compare refractive outcomes between total keratometry using a swept-source optical biometer and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. We included patients who underwent cataract surgery with refractive multifocal IOL implantation. The IOL power was calculated using conventional formulas (Haigis, SRK/T, Holladay 2, and Barrett Universal II) as well as a new formula (Barrett TK Universal II). The refractive mean error, mean absolute error, and median absolute error were compared, as were the proportions of eyes within ± 0.25 diopters (D), ± 0.50 D, and ± 1.00 D of prediction error. In total 543 eyes of 543 patients, the absolute prediction error of total keratometry was significantly higher than that of conventional keratometry using the SRK/T (P = 0.034) and Barrett Universal II (P = 0.003). The proportion of eyes within ± 0.50 D of the prediction error using the SRK/T and Barrett Universal II was also significantly higher when using conventional keratometry than total keratometry (P = 0.010 for SRK/T and P = 0.005 for Barrett Universal II). Prediction accuracy of conventional keratometry was higher than that of total keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal IOL implantation.Ho Seok ChungJae Lim ChungYoung Jun KimHun LeeJae Yong KimHungwon TchahNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 1-7 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Ho Seok Chung Jae Lim Chung Young Jun Kim Hun Lee Jae Yong Kim Hungwon Tchah Comparing prediction accuracy between total keratometry and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation
description	Abstract We aimed to compare refractive outcomes between total keratometry using a swept-source optical biometer and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. We included patients who underwent cataract surgery with refractive multifocal IOL implantation. The IOL power was calculated using conventional formulas (Haigis, SRK/T, Holladay 2, and Barrett Universal II) as well as a new formula (Barrett TK Universal II). The refractive mean error, mean absolute error, and median absolute error were compared, as were the proportions of eyes within ± 0.25 diopters (D), ± 0.50 D, and ± 1.00 D of prediction error. In total 543 eyes of 543 patients, the absolute prediction error of total keratometry was significantly higher than that of conventional keratometry using the SRK/T (P = 0.034) and Barrett Universal II (P = 0.003). The proportion of eyes within ± 0.50 D of the prediction error using the SRK/T and Barrett Universal II was also significantly higher when using conventional keratometry than total keratometry (P = 0.010 for SRK/T and P = 0.005 for Barrett Universal II). Prediction accuracy of conventional keratometry was higher than that of total keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal IOL implantation.
format	article
author	Ho Seok Chung Jae Lim Chung Young Jun Kim Hun Lee Jae Yong Kim Hungwon Tchah
author_facet	Ho Seok Chung Jae Lim Chung Young Jun Kim Hun Lee Jae Yong Kim Hungwon Tchah
author_sort	Ho Seok Chung
title	Comparing prediction accuracy between total keratometry and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation
title_short	Comparing prediction accuracy between total keratometry and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation
title_full	Comparing prediction accuracy between total keratometry and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation
title_fullStr	Comparing prediction accuracy between total keratometry and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation
title_full_unstemmed	Comparing prediction accuracy between total keratometry and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation
title_sort	comparing prediction accuracy between total keratometry and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation
publisher	Nature Portfolio
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/f03c87ac1b26488a9765a67cd7d7cce6
work_keys_str_mv	AT hoseokchung comparingpredictionaccuracybetweentotalkeratometryandconventionalkeratometryincataractsurgerywithrefractivemultifocalintraocularlensimplantation AT jaelimchung comparingpredictionaccuracybetweentotalkeratometryandconventionalkeratometryincataractsurgerywithrefractivemultifocalintraocularlensimplantation AT youngjunkim comparingpredictionaccuracybetweentotalkeratometryandconventionalkeratometryincataractsurgerywithrefractivemultifocalintraocularlensimplantation AT hunlee comparingpredictionaccuracybetweentotalkeratometryandconventionalkeratometryincataractsurgerywithrefractivemultifocalintraocularlensimplantation AT jaeyongkim comparingpredictionaccuracybetweentotalkeratometryandconventionalkeratometryincataractsurgerywithrefractivemultifocalintraocularlensimplantation AT hungwontchah comparingpredictionaccuracybetweentotalkeratometryandconventionalkeratometryincataractsurgerywithrefractivemultifocalintraocularlensimplantation
_version_	1718379916885491712

Comparing prediction accuracy between total keratometry and conventional keratometry in cataract surgery with refractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation

Ejemplares similares