Copy the page URI to the clipboard
Langenbucher, Achim; Hoffmann, Peter; Cayless, Alan; Wendelstein, Jascha and Szentmáry, Nóra
(2024).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001370
Abstract
Purpose: To compare actual and formula predicted postoperative refractive astigmatism using measured posterior corneal power measurements and four different empiric posterior corneal astigmatism correction models.
Setting: Tertiary Care Center.
Design: Single-center retrospective consecutive case series.
Methods: Using a dataset of 211 eyes before and after tIOL implantation (Hoya Vivinex), IOLMaster (IOLM) or Casia2 (CASIA) keratometric and front / back surface corneal power measurements were converted to power vector components C0 (0/90°) and C45 (45/135°). Differences between postoperative and Castrop formula predicted refraction at the corneal plane using the labelled parameters of the tIOL and the keratometric or front / back surface corneal powers were recorded as the effect of corneal back surface astigmatism (BSA).
Results: Generally, the centroid of the difference shifted towards negative C0 values indicating that BSA adds some against the rule corneal astigmatism (ATR). From IOLM / CASIA keratometry, the average difference in C0 was 0.39 / 0.32 dpt. After correction with the Abulafia-Koch, Goggin, La Hood, and Castrop nomograms it was -0.18 / -0.24 dpt, 0.27 / 0.18 dpt, 0.13 / 0.08 dpt, and 0.17 / 0.10 dpt. Using corneal front / back surface data from IOLM / CASIA, the difference was 0.18 / 0.12 dpt.
Conclusions: The Abulafia-Koch method over-corrected the ATR, while the Goggin, La Hood, and Castrop models slightly under-corrected ATR, and using measurements from the Casia2 tomographer seemed to produce slightly less prediction error than IOLMaster 700.
Viewing alternatives
Metrics
Public Attention
Altmetrics from AltmetricNumber of Citations
Citations from Dimensions- Request a copy from the author This document will be available to download from 26 November 2024