Severity: Warning
Message: opendir(/var/lib/php/sessions): Failed to open directory: Permission denied
Filename: drivers/Session_files_driver.php
Line Number: 365
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Purpose: To evaluate whether the refractive changes induced by excimer laser surgery can be accurately measured by corneal ray tracing performed by a combined rotating Scheimpflug camera-Placido-disk corneal topographer (Sirius).
Setting: Private practices.
Design: Evaluation of diagnostic test.
Methods: This multicenter retrospective study comprised patients who had myopic or hyperopic excimer laser refractive surgery. Preoperatively and postoperatively, 2 corneal power measurements--simulated keratometry (K) and mean pupil power--were obtained. The mean pupil power was the corneal power calculated over the entrance pupil by ray tracing through the anterior and posterior corneal surfaces using Snell's law. Agreement between the refractive and corneal power change was analyzed according to Bland and Altman. Regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate agreement between measurements.
Results: The study evaluated 72 eyes (54 patients). The difference between the postoperative and preoperative simulated K values underestimated the refractive change after myopic correction and overestimated it after hyperopic correction. Agreement between simulated K changes and refractive changes was poor, especially for higher amounts of correction. A proportional bias was detected (r = -0.77; P<.0001), and the 95% limits of agreement (LoA) were -0.15 -0.14 × ±0.62 diopters (D). The difference between the postoperative and preoperative mean pupil power showed an excellent correlation with the refractive change (r(2) = 0.98). The mean pupil power did not overestimate or underestimate the refractive change. The 95% LoA ranged between -0.97 D and +0.56 D.
Conclusion: Corneal ray tracing accurately measured corneal power changes after excimer laser refractive surgery.
Financial Disclosures: Dr. Calossi is consultant to Costruzione Strumenti Oftalmici. Dr. Carones is consultant to Wavelight Laser Technologie AG. No other author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.11.032 | DOI Listing |
J Refract Surg
September 2025
From the Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe-University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany and.
Purpose: To evaluate intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation of a non-diffractive extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) without historical data.
Methods: In this consecutive case series, patients who had undergone lens surgery with implantation of a non-diffractive EDOF IOL after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) at the Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany, were included. Preoperative assessments included biometry and tomography using Scheimpflug technology (Pentacam; Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH).
J Refract Surg
September 2025
From Qvision, Department of Ophthalmology of VITHAS Almería Hospital, Almería, Spain.
Purpose: To assess differences in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation prediction error (PE) considering the manufacturing tolerance or exact power (EP) versus labeled power (LP), and to compare accuracy using the Barrett formula with optimized constant versus a thick-lens formula.
Methods: The PE and absolute PE were calculated for a random eye of patients implanted with the multifocal Liberty Q-Flex 640PM IOL (Medicontur Ltd) considering the LP and the EP provided by the manufacturer. The outcomes for the Barrett with optimized constant formula and a thick-lens formula personalized for the surgeon, biometer, and IOL were compared.
Eye (Lond)
September 2025
Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Visual Impairment and Restoration, Eye and ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Objectives: To compare the accuracy of two different corneal refractive power measurements in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in post-myopic-LASIK eyes.
Methods: Post-myopic-LASIK patients scheduled for cataract surgery were enrolled. Corneal refractive power centred on corneal apex (K) and pupil centre (K), decentration of ablation zone, and Kappa angle were measured by Pentacam.
Front Cell Dev Biol
August 2025
Jinan University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Purpose: This study aims to explore the factors influencing refractive error following Phacoemulsification combined with intraocular lens implantation (PE + IOL) in patients with primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG), providing a theoretical basis for preoperative consultation and IOL power selection in clinical practice.
Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 404 PACG patients from Shenzhen Eye Hospital between 2019 and 2024. Preoperative ocular biometric parameters and combined surgical approaches were evaluated using Spearman correlation, multinomial logistic regression, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.
Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther
September 2025
Department of Ophthalmology, The People's Hospital of Baoan Shenzhen, Shenzhen 518000, China; Department of Ophthalmology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518000, China. Electronic address:
Objectives: To investigate the relationship between variability of preoperative ocular biometric measurements and the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation.
Methods: This retrospective study included cataract patients who underwent surgery at the People's Hospital of Baoan Shenzhen from January 2022 to December 2024. Preoperative ocular biometric parameters were measured using the Lenstar LS-900, and the coefficients of variation (CV) of corneal curvature (K1-CV, K2-CV), axial length (AL-CV), anterior chamber depth (ACD-CV) were calculated.