论文部分内容阅读
目的比较IOL-Master与传统方法测量人工晶体度数的准确性,以了解其特点及应用价值。方法分析2005年1月～6月间于我院行白内障超声乳化摘除及人工晶状体植入术的年龄相关性白内障167人213眼,术前分别用IOL-Master、传统的超声生物测量仪和角膜曲率计测量眼轴长度和角膜曲率,使用SRK-II或SRK/T公式计算植入人工晶体的度数。术后3m检查患者屈光状态。结果用IOL-Master和超声生物测量仪检测眼轴长度:L>26mm组分别为21.47±0.58mm和21.60±0.64mm,两者对比有显著性差异(P<0.05),L≤26mm各组,两者对比无显著性差异(P>0.05);IOL-Master和角膜曲率计检测量角膜曲率分别为44.27±1.72D和43.92±1.53D,两者对比无显著性差异(P>0.05);术后3m,两种方法的绝对屈光误差比较:L>26mm组分别为0.885±0.683D和1.459±0.724D,两者对比有显著性差异(P<0.05),L≤26mm各组,两者对比无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论应用IOL-Master测量人工晶状体度数,具有准确性、非接触性、操作简便、安全而且病人易于接受的特点,但也有一定局限性,不能完全替代A超。
Objective To compare the accuracy of IOL-Master with the traditional method to measure the degree of intraocular lens (IOL) to understand its characteristics and application value. Methods A total of 213 eyes of 167 age-related cataract patients undergoing cataract phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation in our hospital from January to June 2005 were retrospectively analyzed. Preoperative IOL-Master, conventional ultrasound biometrics and corneal Curvature was measured for axial length and corneal curvature, and the degree of intraocular lens implantation was calculated using the SRK-II or SRK / T formula. 3m postoperative refractive status examination. Results The length of axial length was measured by IOL-Master and ultrasonic bioassay: 21.47 ± 0.58mm and 21.60 ± 0.64mm respectively in L> 26mm group, with significant difference (P <0.05) There was no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). The corneal curvature measured by IOL-Master and keratometer were 44.27 ± 1.72D and 43.92 ± 1.53D respectively, with no significant difference (P> 0.05) After 3m, absolute refractive errors of the two methods were compared: L> 26mm group were 0.885 ± 0.683D and 1.459 ± 0.724D, there was significant difference between the two groups (P <0.05), L≤26mm each group, both There was no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). Conclusions IOL-Master is an accurate, non-contact, simple, safe and patient-friendly method for measuring intraocular lens power. However, it has some limitations and can not completely replace A-ultrasound.