长眼轴白内障眼六种人工晶体度数计算公式的准确性分析  

Analysis on the accuracy of 6 formulas for calculating the degree of intraocularlens in cataract patients with an eye with a long axial length

作　　者：杨智 史庆成 吴海娟 周衍文 YANG Zhi;SHI Qing-cheng;WU Hai-juan;ZHOU Yan-wen(Department of Cataract,Shenyang Aier Optometry Hospital,Liaoning Province,Shenyang110003,China;Department of Comprehensive Eye Disease,Kangping Aier Eye Hospital,Liaoning Province,Kangping110500,China)

机构地区：[1]沈阳爱尔眼视光医院白内障科,辽宁沈阳110003 [2]辽宁省康平爱尔眼科医院综合眼病科,辽宁康平110500

出　　处：《中国当代医药》2021年第32期134-136,共3页China Modern Medicine

摘　　要：目的比较Kane、Hoffer QST、Barrett UniversalⅡ、SRK-T、Hoffer Q和Holladay2六种公式在长眼轴白内障患者中的人工晶体(IOL)度数计算的准确性。方法回顾性分析2019年3月至2020年3月沈阳爱尔眼视光医院收治的44例(44眼)长眼轴(>26 mm)的白内障患者临床资料,计算并比较六种公式预测IOL度数的中位绝对屈光度误差(Med AE)以及误差在0.50 D及1.0 D内的比例。结果Barrett UniversalⅡ、Kane公式组Med AE低于SRK-T、Hoffer Q和Holladay2公式组,Hoffer QST公式组Med AE低于Hoffer Q和Holladay2公式组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。Kane、Barrett UniversalⅡ、Hoffer QST、SRK-T、Holladay2、Hoffer Q公式误差在0.5 D以内的比例分别为36.4%、27.3%、22.7%、9.1%、4.5%、4.5%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);误差在1.0 D以内的比例分别为70.5%、63.6%、50%、31.8%、11.4%、9.1%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。Kane、Barrett UniversalⅡ、Hoffer QST、SRK-T、Holladay2、Hoffer Q公式的平均算术误差(ME)分别为0.64±0.61、0.82±0.55、1.01±0.64、1.32±0.64、1.64±0.62、1.91±0.61,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论对于长眼轴白内障患者,六种公式中,Kane、Barrett UniversalⅡ、Hoffer QST公式计算IOL度数误差更小,误差在0.5 D及1.0 D以内的患者比例更高,推荐临床使用。但各公式普遍远视飘移,建议临床上结合眼轴长度做一定度数的近视预留。Objective To compare the accuracy of postoperative refractive calculation with the six intraocularlens(IOL)calculation formulas(Kane,Hoffer QST,Barrett UniversalⅡ,SRK-T,Hoffer Q and Holladay2)in long-axis cataract patients.Methods Retrospective case-series study.The clinical data of 44 cases(44 eyes)of long-axis cataract(>26 mm)from March 2019 to March 2020 collected at Shenyang aier optometric hospital were analyzed.All patients underwent phacoemulsification combined with implantation of intraocular lens.The median absolute refraction errors(Med AE)and the proportion of the error within 0.50 D and 1.0 D of the six formulas were calculated and compared.Results Barrett UniversalⅡ,Kane formula compared with SRK-T,Hoffer Q and Holladay2 formula,Hoffer QST formula compared with Hoffer Q and Holladay2 formula,the error was smaller,and the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).The proportions of the errors within 0.5 D of Kane,Barrett UniversalⅡ,Hoffer QST,SRK-T,Holladay2 and Hoffer Q formulas were 36.4%,27.3%,22.7%,9.1%,4.5%,4.5%,respectively,the differences were statistically significant(P<0.001).The proportions within 1.0 were 70.5%,63.6%,50%,31.8%、11.4%,9.1%,respectively,the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).The mean refractive error(ME)of Kane,Barrett UniversalⅡ,Hoffer QST,SRK-T,Holladay2 and Hoffer Q formulas were 0.64±0.61,0.82±0.55,1.01±0.64,1.32±0.64,1.64±0.62,1.91±0.61,with statistically significant differences.Conclusion Among the six formulas,Kane,Barrett UniversalⅡand Hoffer QST are more accurate in the calculation of IOL degree for patients with long-axis cataract,the proportions within 0.5 D and 1.0 D are higher,are recommended for clinical use.All formulas drift towards farsightedness,so it is suggested to reserve a certain degree of myopia according to the axial length.

关 键 词：长眼轴 白内障 超声乳化术 人工晶体 计算公式 

分 类 号：R779.66[医药卫生—眼科]