论文部分内容阅读
目的比较六种人工晶状体(IOL)屈光度数计算公式(SRK-T,Haigis,Binkhorst-Ⅱ,HofferQ,Holladay-1,SRK-Ⅱ)在不同眼轴长中的准确性。设计回顾对比临床分析。研究对象169例(169眼)年龄相关性白内障患者。方法将上述白内障患者按术眼眼轴长度(AXL)分成五组,即AXL≤22mm、22mm28.4mm,术前使用A型超声仪测量术眼的眼轴长及角膜屈光度,术后1个月用电脑验光与检影验光相结合的方法测量术眼获得最佳矫正远视力时的实际屈光度数,回输超声测量值及术眼所使用的IOL屈光度数,用SRK-T,Haigis,Binkhorst-Ⅱ,HofferQ,Holladay-1,SRK-Ⅱ这六种公式分别计算术眼的预期屈光度数。比较不同眼轴长度组中预期屈光度数和实际屈光度数的差值。主要指标术后实际屈光度数与预期屈光度数差值的绝对值,即绝对预测误差值。结果在各AXL长度组中,每组中除Binkhorst-Ⅱ公式外,其他5种公式所得出的绝对预测误差值均无统计学差异(P均>0.05);AXL>28.4mm时,这6种公式间均无统计学差异(P均>0.05),但Haigis、SRK-T公式的平均绝对预测误差值明显小于SRK-Ⅱ和Binkhorst-Ⅱ公式。结论在目前的研究样本量下,除Binkhorst-Ⅱ公式外其他五种IOL屈光度数计算公式对术后屈光度的影响无明显差异,但在特长眼轴组(AXL>28.4mm),Haigis、SRK-T公式显示一定的优势。
Objective To compare the accuracy of formulas (SRK-T, Haigis, Binkhorst-Ⅱ, HofferQ, Holladay-1, SRK-Ⅱ) of six IOLs in different axial lengths. Design Review Comparative Clinical Analysis. 169 cases (169 eyes) of age-related cataract patients. Methods The above-mentioned cataract patients were divided into five groups according to axial length of the eye (AXL), that is, AXL≤22mm, 22mm 28.4mm Before using the A-type ultrasound instrument to measure the axial length of the ocular and corneal refractive power, 1 month after surgery with computer optometry and retinoscopy combined with the method of measuring the best correction of ocular ocular refractive power when the actual number of refraction Ultrasound measurements and the IOL power of the eye were used to calculate the expected refractive power of the eye with SRK-T, Haigis, Binkhorst-II, HofferQ, Holladay-1 and SRK-II. The difference between the expected and actual diopters in different axial length groups was compared. The main index after the actual refractive power and the expected difference between the absolute value of the refractive error, that is, the absolute prediction error. Results In each AXL length group, the absolute predictive error values obtained by the other five formulas except for the Binkhorst-Ⅱ formula in each group showed no significant difference (all P> 0.05); when AXL> 28.4mm, these six (P> 0.05). However, the average absolute prediction error of Haigis and SRK-T formulas was significantly lower than that of SRK-Ⅱ and Binkhorst-Ⅱ formulas. Conclusions In the current study sample size, except for Binkhorst-Ⅱ formula, the other five IOL refractive index formulas have no significant difference on postoperative refractive power. However, there are no significant differences between the two groups in terms of extra-axial length (AXL> 28.4mm), Haigis, SRK- T formula shows some advantages.