A超和IOL Master 测量人工晶状体度数的对比研究

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-8535.2018.02.006

广州医药 ›› 2018, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (2): 23-25.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-8535.2018.02.006

A超和IOL Master 测量人工晶状体度数的对比研究

刘淑娟, 金敏, 高宗银, 黄文志, 张柳, 王燕

广州医科大学附属广州市第一人民医院(广州 510180),华南理工大学附属第二医院(广州 510180)

收稿日期:2017-11-24 出版日期:2018-03-20 发布日期:2021-12-01

Comparative study of A-scan and IOL Master in measuring intraocular lens power

LIU Shujuan, JIN Min, GAO Zongyin, HUANG Wenzhi, ZHANG Liu, WANG Yan

Guangzhou First People's Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University; The Second Affiliated Hospital of South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510180, China

Received:2017-11-24 Online:2018-03-20 Published:2021-12-01

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的探讨A超和IOL Master测量人工晶状体度数的精确性,为白内障手术提供客观的临床数据。方法选取300例300眼老年性白内障患者,术前采用A 超和IOL Master测量眼轴长度、自动验光仪测量角膜曲率,A超组利用自动验光仪的角膜曲率数据,IOL Master组利用仪器自带的角膜曲率数据,均使用SRK-T公式计算需要植入的人工晶状体度数,观察术后3 m的屈光状态,使用自动验光仪检测患者屈光状态并分析。结果所有被列入研究的患眼随机分为A超组和IOL Master组, A超组测得的平均眼轴长度为(23.21±0.59)mm,IOL Master组测得的眼轴长度为(23.22±0.59)mm,两组数据对比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);利用自动验光仪测量的术前平均角膜曲率为(44.01±1.79)D,利用IOL Master测量的术前平均角膜曲率为(44.13±1.62)D,两者比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);A超组和IOL Master组术后的平均绝对屈光误差(mean absolute refractive error,MAE)分别为(0.43±0.26)D、(0.42±0.17)D,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 IOL Master在操作上略优于A超,但在人工晶体度数测量上与A超比较没有发现明显优势,不能完全取代A超,两者结合更能确保人工晶体度数测量的精确性。

关键词: 人工晶状体, A 超, IOL Master, 老年性白内障

Abstract: Objective By discussing the accuracy of A-scan and IOL Master in intraocular lens power measurement, to offer Objective clinical data for cataract surgery.Methods Three hundred patients(300 eyes)with age-related cataract were included in the study. Before surgery,axial length was measured by A-scan and IOL Master respectively and corneal curvature was measured by auto refractometer. A-scan group used the corneal curvature data of the auto refractometer. IOL Master group used the corneal curvature data from the instrument. Intraocular lens power was calculated according to the SRK-T formula.We observed the refractive state of 3m after operation, detected and analyzed the patient's refractive data by the auto refractometer.Results All patients who were included in the study were randomly divided into A-scan group and IOL Master group.The mean axial length was (23.21±0.59) mm measured by A-scan, the mean axial length was (23.22±0.59) mm measured by IOL Master. There was no significant difference between them (P>0.05). The preoperative mean corneal curvature measured by the auto refractometer was (44.01±1.79)D. The preoperative mean corneal curvature measured by IOL Master was (44.13±1.62)D. There was no statistically significant difference between them (P＞0.05). The mean absolute refractive error ( MAE) in A－scan group was (0.43±0.26)D and in IOL Master group was (0.42±0.17)D. There was no statistically significant difference between them (P＞0. 05).Conclusion IOL Master group operated slightly better than A-scan group, but we did not find a significant advantage in intraocular lens power measurement with A-scan group. IOL Master may not completely replace A-scan. The combination of the two ensures the accuracy of the measurement in intraocular lens power.

Key words: Intraocular Lens, A-scan, IOL Master, Age-related cataract

刘淑娟, 金敏, 高宗银, 黄文志, 张柳, 王燕. A超和IOL Master 测量人工晶状体度数的对比研究[J]. 广州医药, 2018, 49(2): 23-25.

LIU Shujuan, JIN Min, GAO Zongyin, HUANG Wenzhi, ZHANG Liu, WANG Yan. Comparative study of A-scan and IOL Master in measuring intraocular lens power[J]. Guangzhou Medical Journal, 2018, 49(2): 23-25.

参考文献

[1] SKARA KOLEGA M, KOVACEVIC S, CANOVIC S,et al. Comparison of IOL Master and ultrasound biometry in preoperative intra ocular lens(iol)power calculation[J]. Coll Antropol, 2015,39(1):233-235.
[2] KISS B, FINDL O, MENAPACE R, et al. Refractive outcome of cataract surgery using partial coherence interferometry and ultrasound biometry: clinical feasibility study of a commercial prototype Ⅱ[J]. J Cataract Refract Surg,2002,28(2):230-234.
[3] 李健昌.人工晶体度数测量的研究现状[J]. 医学研究生学报,2009,22(11):1211-1216.
[4] OLSEN T. Sources of errors in intraocular lens power calculation[J]. J Cataract Refract Surg,1992,18(2):125-129.
[5] BINKHORST R D. Intraocular lens power calculation[J]. Int Ophthalmol Clin,1979,19(4):237-252.
[6] OLSEN T, THORWEST M. Calibration of axial length measurements with the Zeiss IOL Master[J]. J Cataract Refract Surg,2005,31(7):1345-1350.
[7] 贾力蕴,王宁厉,梁远波,等. IOL Master与A型超声测量前房深度和眼轴的可重复性和相关性分析[J]. 中国实用眼科杂志,2007,25(1):63-65.
[8] ELEFTHERIADIS H. IOL Master biometry: refractive results of 100 consecutive cases[J]. Br J Ophthalmol,2003,87(8):960-963.
[9] RAYMOND S, FAVILLA I, SANTAMARIA I, et al. Comparing ultrasound biometry with partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens power calculations: a randomized study[J]. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci,2009,50(6):2547-2552.
[10] MOEINI H,ESLAMI F,RISMANCHIAN A,et al. Comparison of ultrasound and optic biometry with respect to eye refractive errors after phacoemulsification[J]. J Res Med Sci,2008,13(2): 43-47.
[11] HSIEH Y T,WANG I J. Intraocular lens power measured by partial coherence interferometry[J]. Optom Vis Sci,2012,89(12):1697-1701.
[12] DREXLER W, FINDL O, MENAPACE R,et al. Partial coherence interferometry: a novel approach to biometry in cataract surgery[J]. Am J Ophthalmol,1998,126(4):524-534.

A超和IOL Master 测量人工晶状体度数的对比研究

Comparative study of A-scan and IOL Master in measuring intraocular lens power

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 0

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价