The predictive accuracy of Barrett toric calculator using measured posterior corneal astigmatism derived from swept source-OCT and Scheimpflug camera
Purpose To compare the performance of Barrett toric calculator incorporated with measured posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA) derived from IOL Master 700 and Pentacam HR versus predicted PCA. Methods The predicted residual astigmatism using Barrett toric IOL calculator with predicted PCA, measured P...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Eye (London) 2024-01, Vol.38 (1), p.132-137 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 137 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 132 |
container_title | Eye (London) |
container_volume | 38 |
creator | Yang, Xiaotong Jiang, Yuanfeng Lin, Song Bai, Xiaomei Yin, Yufan Zhao, FangYu Yang, Jun Tian, Fang Chen, Xiteng Liang, Jingli Bu, Shaochong |
description | Purpose
To compare the performance of Barrett toric calculator incorporated with measured posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA) derived from IOL Master 700 and Pentacam HR versus predicted PCA.
Methods
The predicted residual astigmatism using Barrett toric IOL calculator with predicted PCA, measured PCA from IOL Master 700 and measured PCA from Pentacam were calculated with the preoperative keratometry and intended IOL axis with modification. The vector analysis was performed to calculate the mean absolute prediction error (MAE), the centroid of the prediction error and the percentage of eyes with a prediction error within ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D.
Results
In 57 eyes of 57 patients with mean age of 70.42 ± 10.75 years, the MAE among the three calculation methods were 0.59 ± 0.38 D (Predicted PCA), 0.60 ± 0.38 D (Measured PCA from IOL Master 700) and 0.60 ± 0.36 D (Measured PCA from Pentacam) with no significant difference, either in the whole sample, the WTR eyes and the ATR eyes (F = 0.078, 0.306 and 0.083,
p
= 0.925, 0.739 and 0.920, respectively). Measured PCA obtained from IOL Master 700 resulted in one level reduction (from Tn to Tn-1) in 49.12% eyes in cylindrical model selection, while measured PCA obtained from Pentacam resulted in one level reduction of toric model selection in 18.18% eyes.
Conclusion
The present study suggested that the incorporation of measured PCA values derived from IOL Master 700 and Pentacam produce comparable clinical outcome with the predicted PCA mode in Barrett toric calculator. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1038/s41433-023-02646-1 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10764741</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2831295569</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-906069e8b43a039686c61c169ef858f32657ade7f12684f83bf27878f223e1793</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UcuOFCEUJUbjtKM_4MKQuHFTyquAWhmn4yuZZBa2iTtCU5duJlVFCVSb-RD_V9oex8fCBSHcc-4593IQekrJS0q4fpUFFZw3hB2PFLKh99CKCiWbVrTiPlqRriUNY-zLGXqU8zUhFVTkITrjimuitFqh75s94DlBH1wJB8DWuSVZd4Ojxxc2JSgFl5iCw84ObhlsfeAlh2mHR7B5qZ14jrlAChVwMU1gB2xzCbvRlpBH3FfoUFk-xRHnbzAXnOOSHDRX6w22U48_uT2EcfbDsqsuIyT7GD3wdsjw5PY-R5_fvd2sPzSXV-8_rt9cNk6otjQdkUR2oLeCW8I7qaWT1NFa8rrVnjPZKtuD8pRJLbzmW8_q1tozxoGqjp-j1yfdedmO0DuYSrKDmVMYbbox0QbzNzKFvdnFg6FESaEErQovbhVS_LpALmYM2cEw2Anikg3TnLKubeXR7Pk_1Ov6D1Pdz7COdLxlXMjKYieWSzHnBP5uGkrMMXZzit3U2M3P2M1ximd_7nHX8ivnSuAnQq7QtIP02_s_sj8ABli7Sg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2909352346</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The predictive accuracy of Barrett toric calculator using measured posterior corneal astigmatism derived from swept source-OCT and Scheimpflug camera</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Yang, Xiaotong ; Jiang, Yuanfeng ; Lin, Song ; Bai, Xiaomei ; Yin, Yufan ; Zhao, FangYu ; Yang, Jun ; Tian, Fang ; Chen, Xiteng ; Liang, Jingli ; Bu, Shaochong</creator><creatorcontrib>Yang, Xiaotong ; Jiang, Yuanfeng ; Lin, Song ; Bai, Xiaomei ; Yin, Yufan ; Zhao, FangYu ; Yang, Jun ; Tian, Fang ; Chen, Xiteng ; Liang, Jingli ; Bu, Shaochong</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
To compare the performance of Barrett toric calculator incorporated with measured posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA) derived from IOL Master 700 and Pentacam HR versus predicted PCA.
Methods
The predicted residual astigmatism using Barrett toric IOL calculator with predicted PCA, measured PCA from IOL Master 700 and measured PCA from Pentacam were calculated with the preoperative keratometry and intended IOL axis with modification. The vector analysis was performed to calculate the mean absolute prediction error (MAE), the centroid of the prediction error and the percentage of eyes with a prediction error within ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D.
Results
In 57 eyes of 57 patients with mean age of 70.42 ± 10.75 years, the MAE among the three calculation methods were 0.59 ± 0.38 D (Predicted PCA), 0.60 ± 0.38 D (Measured PCA from IOL Master 700) and 0.60 ± 0.36 D (Measured PCA from Pentacam) with no significant difference, either in the whole sample, the WTR eyes and the ATR eyes (F = 0.078, 0.306 and 0.083,
p
= 0.925, 0.739 and 0.920, respectively). Measured PCA obtained from IOL Master 700 resulted in one level reduction (from Tn to Tn-1) in 49.12% eyes in cylindrical model selection, while measured PCA obtained from Pentacam resulted in one level reduction of toric model selection in 18.18% eyes.
Conclusion
The present study suggested that the incorporation of measured PCA values derived from IOL Master 700 and Pentacam produce comparable clinical outcome with the predicted PCA mode in Barrett toric calculator.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0950-222X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1476-5454</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1476-5454</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1038/s41433-023-02646-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37380787</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Nature Publishing Group UK</publisher><subject>692/308/409 ; 692/699/3161/3168 ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Astigmatism ; Astigmatism - diagnosis ; Astigmatism - surgery ; Biometry - methods ; Cornea ; Corneal Diseases - surgery ; Humans ; Laboratory Medicine ; Lens Implantation, Intraocular - methods ; Lenses, Intraocular ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Ophthalmology ; Phacoemulsification ; Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology ; Predictions ; Refraction, Ocular ; Retrospective Studies ; Surgery ; Surgical Oncology ; Tomography, Optical Coherence ; Visual Acuity</subject><ispartof>Eye (London), 2024-01, Vol.38 (1), p.132-137</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><rights>2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-906069e8b43a039686c61c169ef858f32657ade7f12684f83bf27878f223e1793</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-906069e8b43a039686c61c169ef858f32657ade7f12684f83bf27878f223e1793</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9060-7361</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10764741/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10764741/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318,53790,53792</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37380787$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Yang, Xiaotong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Yuanfeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Song</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bai, Xiaomei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yin, Yufan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhao, FangYu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Jun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tian, Fang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xiteng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liang, Jingli</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bu, Shaochong</creatorcontrib><title>The predictive accuracy of Barrett toric calculator using measured posterior corneal astigmatism derived from swept source-OCT and Scheimpflug camera</title><title>Eye (London)</title><addtitle>Eye</addtitle><addtitle>Eye (Lond)</addtitle><description>Purpose
To compare the performance of Barrett toric calculator incorporated with measured posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA) derived from IOL Master 700 and Pentacam HR versus predicted PCA.
Methods
The predicted residual astigmatism using Barrett toric IOL calculator with predicted PCA, measured PCA from IOL Master 700 and measured PCA from Pentacam were calculated with the preoperative keratometry and intended IOL axis with modification. The vector analysis was performed to calculate the mean absolute prediction error (MAE), the centroid of the prediction error and the percentage of eyes with a prediction error within ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D.
Results
In 57 eyes of 57 patients with mean age of 70.42 ± 10.75 years, the MAE among the three calculation methods were 0.59 ± 0.38 D (Predicted PCA), 0.60 ± 0.38 D (Measured PCA from IOL Master 700) and 0.60 ± 0.36 D (Measured PCA from Pentacam) with no significant difference, either in the whole sample, the WTR eyes and the ATR eyes (F = 0.078, 0.306 and 0.083,
p
= 0.925, 0.739 and 0.920, respectively). Measured PCA obtained from IOL Master 700 resulted in one level reduction (from Tn to Tn-1) in 49.12% eyes in cylindrical model selection, while measured PCA obtained from Pentacam resulted in one level reduction of toric model selection in 18.18% eyes.
Conclusion
The present study suggested that the incorporation of measured PCA values derived from IOL Master 700 and Pentacam produce comparable clinical outcome with the predicted PCA mode in Barrett toric calculator.</description><subject>692/308/409</subject><subject>692/699/3161/3168</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Astigmatism</subject><subject>Astigmatism - diagnosis</subject><subject>Astigmatism - surgery</subject><subject>Biometry - methods</subject><subject>Cornea</subject><subject>Corneal Diseases - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laboratory Medicine</subject><subject>Lens Implantation, Intraocular - methods</subject><subject>Lenses, Intraocular</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Ophthalmology</subject><subject>Phacoemulsification</subject><subject>Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology</subject><subject>Predictions</subject><subject>Refraction, Ocular</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Oncology</subject><subject>Tomography, Optical Coherence</subject><subject>Visual Acuity</subject><issn>0950-222X</issn><issn>1476-5454</issn><issn>1476-5454</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UcuOFCEUJUbjtKM_4MKQuHFTyquAWhmn4yuZZBa2iTtCU5duJlVFCVSb-RD_V9oex8fCBSHcc-4593IQekrJS0q4fpUFFZw3hB2PFLKh99CKCiWbVrTiPlqRriUNY-zLGXqU8zUhFVTkITrjimuitFqh75s94DlBH1wJB8DWuSVZd4Ojxxc2JSgFl5iCw84ObhlsfeAlh2mHR7B5qZ14jrlAChVwMU1gB2xzCbvRlpBH3FfoUFk-xRHnbzAXnOOSHDRX6w22U48_uT2EcfbDsqsuIyT7GD3wdsjw5PY-R5_fvd2sPzSXV-8_rt9cNk6otjQdkUR2oLeCW8I7qaWT1NFa8rrVnjPZKtuD8pRJLbzmW8_q1tozxoGqjp-j1yfdedmO0DuYSrKDmVMYbbox0QbzNzKFvdnFg6FESaEErQovbhVS_LpALmYM2cEw2Anikg3TnLKubeXR7Pk_1Ov6D1Pdz7COdLxlXMjKYieWSzHnBP5uGkrMMXZzit3U2M3P2M1ximd_7nHX8ivnSuAnQq7QtIP02_s_sj8ABli7Sg</recordid><startdate>20240101</startdate><enddate>20240101</enddate><creator>Yang, Xiaotong</creator><creator>Jiang, Yuanfeng</creator><creator>Lin, Song</creator><creator>Bai, Xiaomei</creator><creator>Yin, Yufan</creator><creator>Zhao, FangYu</creator><creator>Yang, Jun</creator><creator>Tian, Fang</creator><creator>Chen, Xiteng</creator><creator>Liang, Jingli</creator><creator>Bu, Shaochong</creator><general>Nature Publishing Group UK</general><general>Nature Publishing Group</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9060-7361</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240101</creationdate><title>The predictive accuracy of Barrett toric calculator using measured posterior corneal astigmatism derived from swept source-OCT and Scheimpflug camera</title><author>Yang, Xiaotong ; Jiang, Yuanfeng ; Lin, Song ; Bai, Xiaomei ; Yin, Yufan ; Zhao, FangYu ; Yang, Jun ; Tian, Fang ; Chen, Xiteng ; Liang, Jingli ; Bu, Shaochong</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-906069e8b43a039686c61c169ef858f32657ade7f12684f83bf27878f223e1793</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>692/308/409</topic><topic>692/699/3161/3168</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Astigmatism</topic><topic>Astigmatism - diagnosis</topic><topic>Astigmatism - surgery</topic><topic>Biometry - methods</topic><topic>Cornea</topic><topic>Corneal Diseases - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laboratory Medicine</topic><topic>Lens Implantation, Intraocular - methods</topic><topic>Lenses, Intraocular</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Ophthalmology</topic><topic>Phacoemulsification</topic><topic>Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology</topic><topic>Predictions</topic><topic>Refraction, Ocular</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Oncology</topic><topic>Tomography, Optical Coherence</topic><topic>Visual Acuity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Yang, Xiaotong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Yuanfeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Song</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bai, Xiaomei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yin, Yufan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhao, FangYu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Jun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tian, Fang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xiteng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liang, Jingli</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bu, Shaochong</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science 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>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Eye (London)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Yang, Xiaotong</au><au>Jiang, Yuanfeng</au><au>Lin, Song</au><au>Bai, Xiaomei</au><au>Yin, Yufan</au><au>Zhao, FangYu</au><au>Yang, Jun</au><au>Tian, Fang</au><au>Chen, Xiteng</au><au>Liang, Jingli</au><au>Bu, Shaochong</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The predictive accuracy of Barrett toric calculator using measured posterior corneal astigmatism derived from swept source-OCT and Scheimpflug camera</atitle><jtitle>Eye (London)</jtitle><stitle>Eye</stitle><addtitle>Eye (Lond)</addtitle><date>2024-01-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>132</spage><epage>137</epage><pages>132-137</pages><issn>0950-222X</issn><issn>1476-5454</issn><eissn>1476-5454</eissn><abstract>Purpose
To compare the performance of Barrett toric calculator incorporated with measured posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA) derived from IOL Master 700 and Pentacam HR versus predicted PCA.
Methods
The predicted residual astigmatism using Barrett toric IOL calculator with predicted PCA, measured PCA from IOL Master 700 and measured PCA from Pentacam were calculated with the preoperative keratometry and intended IOL axis with modification. The vector analysis was performed to calculate the mean absolute prediction error (MAE), the centroid of the prediction error and the percentage of eyes with a prediction error within ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D.
Results
In 57 eyes of 57 patients with mean age of 70.42 ± 10.75 years, the MAE among the three calculation methods were 0.59 ± 0.38 D (Predicted PCA), 0.60 ± 0.38 D (Measured PCA from IOL Master 700) and 0.60 ± 0.36 D (Measured PCA from Pentacam) with no significant difference, either in the whole sample, the WTR eyes and the ATR eyes (F = 0.078, 0.306 and 0.083,
p
= 0.925, 0.739 and 0.920, respectively). Measured PCA obtained from IOL Master 700 resulted in one level reduction (from Tn to Tn-1) in 49.12% eyes in cylindrical model selection, while measured PCA obtained from Pentacam resulted in one level reduction of toric model selection in 18.18% eyes.
Conclusion
The present study suggested that the incorporation of measured PCA values derived from IOL Master 700 and Pentacam produce comparable clinical outcome with the predicted PCA mode in Barrett toric calculator.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Nature Publishing Group UK</pub><pmid>37380787</pmid><doi>10.1038/s41433-023-02646-1</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9060-7361</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0950-222X |
ispartof | Eye (London), 2024-01, Vol.38 (1), p.132-137 |
issn | 0950-222X 1476-5454 1476-5454 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10764741 |
source | MEDLINE; PubMed Central; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | 692/308/409 692/699/3161/3168 Aged Aged, 80 and over Astigmatism Astigmatism - diagnosis Astigmatism - surgery Biometry - methods Cornea Corneal Diseases - surgery Humans Laboratory Medicine Lens Implantation, Intraocular - methods Lenses, Intraocular Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Ophthalmology Phacoemulsification Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology Predictions Refraction, Ocular Retrospective Studies Surgery Surgical Oncology Tomography, Optical Coherence Visual Acuity |
title | The predictive accuracy of Barrett toric calculator using measured posterior corneal astigmatism derived from swept source-OCT and Scheimpflug camera |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T20%3A47%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20predictive%20accuracy%20of%20Barrett%20toric%20calculator%20using%20measured%20posterior%20corneal%20astigmatism%20derived%20from%20swept%20source-OCT%20and%20Scheimpflug%20camera&rft.jtitle=Eye%20(London)&rft.au=Yang,%20Xiaotong&rft.date=2024-01-01&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=132&rft.epage=137&rft.pages=132-137&rft.issn=0950-222X&rft.eissn=1476-5454&rft_id=info:doi/10.1038/s41433-023-02646-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2831295569%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2909352346&rft_id=info:pmid/37380787&rfr_iscdi=true |