ABSTRACT
AIM: To compare the difference and consistency of corneal refractive power and astigmatism measured by CASIA2 and IOL Master 700 in patients with age-related cataract.METHODS: Retrospective study. A total of 153 patients(232 eyes)with age-related cataract admitted to Daping hospital from November to December 2021 were selected. The flat keratometry(Kf), steep keratometry(Ks), mean keratometry(Km), degree and axis of astigmatism(vector representation J0 and J45)of the anterior, posterior surfaces together with the total cornea from cataract patients were measured by CASIA2 and IOL Master 700, respectively. The difference, correlation and consistency of the two instruments were analyzed.RESULTS:There was no significant difference in J45 values of posterior corneal surface measured by CASIA2 and IOL Master 700(-0.006±0.038D vs. -0.005±0.044D, P>0.05), but there were significant differences in other parameters(all P<0.05). All parameters measured by the two instruments were significantly positive correlated(all r/rs>0.7, P<0.001); Bland-Altman analysis showed that the refractive power and astigmatism of the anterior cornea surface measured by the two facilities were in good consistency, while the refractive power of the posterior surface and the whole cornea showed poor consistency.CONCLUSION: CASIA2 and IOL Master 700 showed little differences and good consistency in the refractive power and astigmatism of the anterior, posterior and total corneal surface in cataract patients, which seems interchangeable. However, the refractive power of the posterior surface and the whole cornea has significant differences and poor consistency, which should not be interchange casually.
ABSTRACT
@#AIM: To assess the accuracy of optical quality analysis system Ⅱ(OQAS Ⅱ)in predicting postoperative visual acuity of cataract patients.<p>METHODS: Prospective study, patients underwent cataract surgery in Daping Hospital from June 2019 to November 2019 were recruited. According to predicted visual acuity 100%(PVA100%)and best corrected visual acuity(BCVA), patients were dichotomized into group A(PVA100% worse than BCVA, 145 eyes)and group B(PVA100% equal to or better than BCVA, 114 eyes). Visual acuity improvement was compared between the two groups 1mo after surgery.<p>RESULTS: In group A, visual acuity of 112 eyes(77.2%)improved at least 2 lines. While in group B, 93 eyes(81.6%)improved at least 2 lines. There was no significant difference in visual acuity improvement ratio between the two groups(<i>P</i>=0.394). The average BCVA improvement of group A was 0.3(0.2, 0.4)LogMAR, and that of group B was 0.4(0.2, 0.5)LogMAR, revealed statistically significant differences(<i>P</i>=0.001). No significant correlation was found between preoperative PVA100% and postoperative BCVA in both of the two groups(<i>P</i>=0.888,0.304). In patients combined with preoperative ocular comorbidity, 17 eyes(94.4%)in group A and 26 eyes(65.0%)in group B improved at least 2 lines with significant difference between the two groups(<i>P</i>=0.041). BCVA improved 0.3(0.2, 0.4)LogMAR in group A and 0.3(0.1, 0.5)LogMAR in group B, there was no significant difference between the two groups(<i>P</i>=0.597).<p>CONCLUSION: The binary classification method based on the value of preoperative PVA100% and BCVA failed to accurately predict who shall benefit more from cataract surgery. In patients diagnosed with preoperative ocular comorbidity, BCVA is likely to be significantly improved if preoperative PVA100% were worse than BCVA. More data are needed to determine the clinical value of PVA100%.