Loading…
Toric Intraocular Lens Results Considering Posterior Corneal Astigmatism with Online Calculators: Phacoemulsification vs. Femtosecond
To evaluate the prediction error (PE) obtained in Phacoemulsification (Phaco) or Femtosecond (Femto) surgeries without considering posterior corneal astigmatism correction (non-PCA) versus the correction based on Abulafia-Koch + Medicontur (AK) and Barrett calculators in toric intraocular lens (IOL)...
Saved in:
Published in: | Optics 2021-09, Vol.2 (3), p.184-192 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-a038eacff73754f7a1a3502152831b6a83190cb43fedaf0a878080fb359038ae3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-a038eacff73754f7a1a3502152831b6a83190cb43fedaf0a878080fb359038ae3 |
container_end_page | 192 |
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 184 |
container_title | Optics |
container_volume | 2 |
creator | Fernández, Joaquín Rodríguez-Vallejo, Manuel Burguera, Noemí Salvestrini, Patrizia Garzón, Nuria |
description | To evaluate the prediction error (PE) obtained in Phacoemulsification (Phaco) or Femtosecond (Femto) surgeries without considering posterior corneal astigmatism correction (non-PCA) versus the correction based on Abulafia-Koch + Medicontur (AK) and Barrett calculators in toric intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation. 58 right eyes were retrospectively retrieved from our database. Two groups formed by 28 and 30 eyes depending on the surgery type, Phaco or Femto respectively, were defined. Astigmatism PE were evaluated considering the approach used for calculation of the implanted IOL power (AK) versus the estimation of PEs in non-PCA and Barrett formula. A doubly-multivariate analysis was conducted to assess the differences between-surgery types, within-methods of calculation, and interaction. Mean centroid PE was significantly different between non-PCA, AK and Barrett approaches (p < 0.0005), and neither differences (p < 0.239) nor interaction (p = 0.672) between Phaco or Femto were found. Post-hoc univariate analysis showed a higher PE for the x-component of the non-PCA method versus AK (0.15 D, p < 0.0005) and non-PCA versus Barrett (0.18 D, p < 0.0005), though no differences were found between AK and Barrett (0.03 D, p = 0.93). Against-the-rule under-correction and with-the-rule overcorrection were found in both arms when PCA was not considered. Both calculators provide comparable clinical results. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/opt2030017 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_afba7b15afc34d91a3f759a812244472</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_afba7b15afc34d91a3f759a812244472</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2656393764</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-a038eacff73754f7a1a3502152831b6a83190cb43fedaf0a878080fb359038ae3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNUV1r3DAQNKWFhiQv_QWCvhUu1Ydt2X0LR5MeHOQo6bNYy9JFh629auWW_ID87yi90vRldxhmZxamqj4IfqVUzz_jMUuuOBf6TXUmW61WSrb92__w--qS6MA5l13TdlqcVU_3mIJlm5gToF0mSGzrIrHvjpYpE1tjpDC6FOKe7ZByQZgKm6KDiV1TDvsZcqCZ_Q75gd3FKUTH1jC9eGVM9IXtHsCim5eJgg-2iDGyX3TFbtyckZzFOF5U7zxM5C7_7vPqx83X-_W31fbudrO-3q6sakVeAVedA-u9VrqpvQYBquFSNLJTYmihzJ7boVbejeA5dLrjHfeDavpyCU6dV5uT74hwMMcUZkiPBiGYPwSmvYGUg52cAT-AHkQD3qp67EuS100PnZCyrmsti9fHk9cx4c_FUTYHXFIs7xvZNq3qlW7rovp0UtmERMn5f6mCm5fWzGtr6hmzr4wC</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2656393764</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Toric Intraocular Lens Results Considering Posterior Corneal Astigmatism with Online Calculators: Phacoemulsification vs. Femtosecond</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><creator>Fernández, Joaquín ; Rodríguez-Vallejo, Manuel ; Burguera, Noemí ; Salvestrini, Patrizia ; Garzón, Nuria</creator><creatorcontrib>Fernández, Joaquín ; Rodríguez-Vallejo, Manuel ; Burguera, Noemí ; Salvestrini, Patrizia ; Garzón, Nuria</creatorcontrib><description>To evaluate the prediction error (PE) obtained in Phacoemulsification (Phaco) or Femtosecond (Femto) surgeries without considering posterior corneal astigmatism correction (non-PCA) versus the correction based on Abulafia-Koch + Medicontur (AK) and Barrett calculators in toric intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation. 58 right eyes were retrospectively retrieved from our database. Two groups formed by 28 and 30 eyes depending on the surgery type, Phaco or Femto respectively, were defined. Astigmatism PE were evaluated considering the approach used for calculation of the implanted IOL power (AK) versus the estimation of PEs in non-PCA and Barrett formula. A doubly-multivariate analysis was conducted to assess the differences between-surgery types, within-methods of calculation, and interaction. Mean centroid PE was significantly different between non-PCA, AK and Barrett approaches (p < 0.0005), and neither differences (p < 0.239) nor interaction (p = 0.672) between Phaco or Femto were found. Post-hoc univariate analysis showed a higher PE for the x-component of the non-PCA method versus AK (0.15 D, p < 0.0005) and non-PCA versus Barrett (0.18 D, p < 0.0005), though no differences were found between AK and Barrett (0.03 D, p = 0.93). Against-the-rule under-correction and with-the-rule overcorrection were found in both arms when PCA was not considered. Both calculators provide comparable clinical results.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2673-3269</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2673-3269</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/opt2030017</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Siegen: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Cataracts ; Cornea ; Eye surgery ; femtosecond ; Patients ; phacoemulsification ; posterior corneal astigmatism ; prediction error ; toric intraocular lens ; Variables</subject><ispartof>Optics, 2021-09, Vol.2 (3), p.184-192</ispartof><rights>2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-a038eacff73754f7a1a3502152831b6a83190cb43fedaf0a878080fb359038ae3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-a038eacff73754f7a1a3502152831b6a83190cb43fedaf0a878080fb359038ae3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5466-875X ; 0000-0002-6162-0081</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2656393764/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2656393764?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25752,27923,27924,37011,44589,74997</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fernández, Joaquín</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodríguez-Vallejo, Manuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burguera, Noemí</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salvestrini, Patrizia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garzón, Nuria</creatorcontrib><title>Toric Intraocular Lens Results Considering Posterior Corneal Astigmatism with Online Calculators: Phacoemulsification vs. Femtosecond</title><title>Optics</title><description>To evaluate the prediction error (PE) obtained in Phacoemulsification (Phaco) or Femtosecond (Femto) surgeries without considering posterior corneal astigmatism correction (non-PCA) versus the correction based on Abulafia-Koch + Medicontur (AK) and Barrett calculators in toric intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation. 58 right eyes were retrospectively retrieved from our database. Two groups formed by 28 and 30 eyes depending on the surgery type, Phaco or Femto respectively, were defined. Astigmatism PE were evaluated considering the approach used for calculation of the implanted IOL power (AK) versus the estimation of PEs in non-PCA and Barrett formula. A doubly-multivariate analysis was conducted to assess the differences between-surgery types, within-methods of calculation, and interaction. Mean centroid PE was significantly different between non-PCA, AK and Barrett approaches (p < 0.0005), and neither differences (p < 0.239) nor interaction (p = 0.672) between Phaco or Femto were found. Post-hoc univariate analysis showed a higher PE for the x-component of the non-PCA method versus AK (0.15 D, p < 0.0005) and non-PCA versus Barrett (0.18 D, p < 0.0005), though no differences were found between AK and Barrett (0.03 D, p = 0.93). Against-the-rule under-correction and with-the-rule overcorrection were found in both arms when PCA was not considered. Both calculators provide comparable clinical results.</description><subject>Cataracts</subject><subject>Cornea</subject><subject>Eye surgery</subject><subject>femtosecond</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>phacoemulsification</subject><subject>posterior corneal astigmatism</subject><subject>prediction error</subject><subject>toric intraocular lens</subject><subject>Variables</subject><issn>2673-3269</issn><issn>2673-3269</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpNUV1r3DAQNKWFhiQv_QWCvhUu1Ydt2X0LR5MeHOQo6bNYy9JFh629auWW_ID87yi90vRldxhmZxamqj4IfqVUzz_jMUuuOBf6TXUmW61WSrb92__w--qS6MA5l13TdlqcVU_3mIJlm5gToF0mSGzrIrHvjpYpE1tjpDC6FOKe7ZByQZgKm6KDiV1TDvsZcqCZ_Q75gd3FKUTH1jC9eGVM9IXtHsCim5eJgg-2iDGyX3TFbtyckZzFOF5U7zxM5C7_7vPqx83X-_W31fbudrO-3q6sakVeAVedA-u9VrqpvQYBquFSNLJTYmihzJ7boVbejeA5dLrjHfeDavpyCU6dV5uT74hwMMcUZkiPBiGYPwSmvYGUg52cAT-AHkQD3qp67EuS100PnZCyrmsti9fHk9cx4c_FUTYHXFIs7xvZNq3qlW7rovp0UtmERMn5f6mCm5fWzGtr6hmzr4wC</recordid><startdate>20210901</startdate><enddate>20210901</enddate><creator>Fernández, Joaquín</creator><creator>Rodríguez-Vallejo, Manuel</creator><creator>Burguera, Noemí</creator><creator>Salvestrini, Patrizia</creator><creator>Garzón, Nuria</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5466-875X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6162-0081</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210901</creationdate><title>Toric Intraocular Lens Results Considering Posterior Corneal Astigmatism with Online Calculators: Phacoemulsification vs. Femtosecond</title><author>Fernández, Joaquín ; Rodríguez-Vallejo, Manuel ; Burguera, Noemí ; Salvestrini, Patrizia ; Garzón, Nuria</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-a038eacff73754f7a1a3502152831b6a83190cb43fedaf0a878080fb359038ae3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Cataracts</topic><topic>Cornea</topic><topic>Eye surgery</topic><topic>femtosecond</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>phacoemulsification</topic><topic>posterior corneal astigmatism</topic><topic>prediction error</topic><topic>toric intraocular lens</topic><topic>Variables</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fernández, Joaquín</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodríguez-Vallejo, Manuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burguera, Noemí</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salvestrini, Patrizia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garzón, Nuria</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Optics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fernández, Joaquín</au><au>Rodríguez-Vallejo, Manuel</au><au>Burguera, Noemí</au><au>Salvestrini, Patrizia</au><au>Garzón, Nuria</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Toric Intraocular Lens Results Considering Posterior Corneal Astigmatism with Online Calculators: Phacoemulsification vs. Femtosecond</atitle><jtitle>Optics</jtitle><date>2021-09-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>2</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>184</spage><epage>192</epage><pages>184-192</pages><issn>2673-3269</issn><eissn>2673-3269</eissn><abstract>To evaluate the prediction error (PE) obtained in Phacoemulsification (Phaco) or Femtosecond (Femto) surgeries without considering posterior corneal astigmatism correction (non-PCA) versus the correction based on Abulafia-Koch + Medicontur (AK) and Barrett calculators in toric intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation. 58 right eyes were retrospectively retrieved from our database. Two groups formed by 28 and 30 eyes depending on the surgery type, Phaco or Femto respectively, were defined. Astigmatism PE were evaluated considering the approach used for calculation of the implanted IOL power (AK) versus the estimation of PEs in non-PCA and Barrett formula. A doubly-multivariate analysis was conducted to assess the differences between-surgery types, within-methods of calculation, and interaction. Mean centroid PE was significantly different between non-PCA, AK and Barrett approaches (p < 0.0005), and neither differences (p < 0.239) nor interaction (p = 0.672) between Phaco or Femto were found. Post-hoc univariate analysis showed a higher PE for the x-component of the non-PCA method versus AK (0.15 D, p < 0.0005) and non-PCA versus Barrett (0.18 D, p < 0.0005), though no differences were found between AK and Barrett (0.03 D, p = 0.93). Against-the-rule under-correction and with-the-rule overcorrection were found in both arms when PCA was not considered. Both calculators provide comparable clinical results.</abstract><cop>Siegen</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><doi>10.3390/opt2030017</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5466-875X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6162-0081</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2673-3269 |
ispartof | Optics, 2021-09, Vol.2 (3), p.184-192 |
issn | 2673-3269 2673-3269 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_afba7b15afc34d91a3f759a812244472 |
source | Publicly Available Content Database |
subjects | Cataracts Cornea Eye surgery femtosecond Patients phacoemulsification posterior corneal astigmatism prediction error toric intraocular lens Variables |
title | Toric Intraocular Lens Results Considering Posterior Corneal Astigmatism with Online Calculators: Phacoemulsification vs. Femtosecond |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T21%3A06%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Toric%20Intraocular%20Lens%20Results%20Considering%20Posterior%20Corneal%20Astigmatism%20with%20Online%20Calculators:%20Phacoemulsification%20vs.%20Femtosecond&rft.jtitle=Optics&rft.au=Fern%C3%A1ndez,%20Joaqu%C3%ADn&rft.date=2021-09-01&rft.volume=2&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=184&rft.epage=192&rft.pages=184-192&rft.issn=2673-3269&rft.eissn=2673-3269&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/opt2030017&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2656393764%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c361t-a038eacff73754f7a1a3502152831b6a83190cb43fedaf0a878080fb359038ae3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2656393764&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |