Understanding post-operative refractive outcome in pediatrics after IOL implementation: factors and predictors

Background In pediatric ophthalmology, calculating intra-ocular lens (IOL) power can be challenging. It is important to predict if the post-surgery refractive error (RE) will meet the intended refractive goal. In this study, we aimed to investigate the factors and predictors influencing RE outcomes...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International ophthalmology 2024-09, Vol.44 (1), p.364, Article 364
Hauptverfasser: AlObaisi, Saif, Alnasser, Bashair N., Almuhawas, Hana A., Alhoshan, Saja A., Aldebasi, Mohammed H., Alshaye, Rana, Aldakhil, Sulaiman, Alrasheed, Saif H.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background In pediatric ophthalmology, calculating intra-ocular lens (IOL) power can be challenging. It is important to predict if the post-surgery refractive error (RE) will meet the intended refractive goal. In this study, we aimed to investigate the factors and predictors influencing RE outcomes in children undergoing IOL implantation. Methods This was a retrospective cross-sectional cohort study that involved 47 eyes with congenital cataracts underwent IOL implantation. Each patient underwent follow-up visits at two months and two years’ post-surgery. The IOL power calculations were conducted using the Holladay 1 formula, and both the prediction error (PE) and absolute prediction error (APE) were calculated. Results The mean age was 6.52 ± 4.61 years, with an age range of 1–15 years. The mean IOL power was 20.31 ± 6.57 D, and the mean post-operative refraction was 1.31 ± 2.65 D. The mean of PE and APE were 0.67 ± 1.77 and 1.55 ± 1.06 D, respectively. Whereas PE was correlated to axial length with an R-value of − 0.29 ( P  = 0.04). The calculation method had a significant negative relationship with APE and PE, with coefficients of − 1.05 ( P  = 0.009) and − 1.81 ( P  = 0.009), respectively. Conclusion High astigmatism was associated with greater errors in the refractive outcome. The calculation methods had the most considerable impact on the post-operative RE. The customization of surgical approaches to accommodate individual characteristics is crucial. Further research with diverse subgroups is needed to comprehensively understand the influence of each factor.
ISSN:1573-2630
0165-5701
1573-2630
DOI:10.1007/s10792-024-03280-w