医学
眼科
镜头(地质)
选择(遗传算法)
光学
人工智能
计算机科学
物理
作者
Ruoxi Gao,Jiaqing Zhang,Xiaotong Han,Yiguo Huang,Ruoxuan Huang,Jinfeng Ye,Ling Wen,Xiaozhang Qiu,Xiaoyun Chen,Xuhua Tan,Lixia Luo
标识
DOI:10.1186/s12886-024-03793-z
摘要
PURPOSE: To evaluate the predictive accuracy of 11 intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas in eyes with an axial length (AL) less than 22.00 mm. METHODS: New-generation formulas (Barrett Universal II [BUII], Emmetropia Verifying Optical [EVO] 2.0, Hill-Radial Basis Function [Hill-RBF] 3.0, Hoffer QST, K6, Kane, Pearl-DGS) and traditional formulas (Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1 and SRK/T) were evaluated for predictive accuracy. Subgroup analyses were performed based on AL and anterior chamber depth (ACD). RESULTS: The study enrolled a total of 184 eyes from 184 patients. The BUII, Hoffer QST, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T showed myopic shifts (-0.49 to -0.18 diopters [D], P < 0.05), whereas K6 displayed a hyperopic shift (0.11 D, P = 0.03). The Kane exhibited no systematic bias (-0.07 D), and yielded lower mean absolute error (MAE) (0.48 D, P < 0.05) and root mean square absolute error (RMSAE) (0.65 D, P < 0.01). For eyes with an AL ≤ 21.5 mm and an ACD > 2.5 mm, the Pearl-DGS displayed the smallest MAE (0.43 D) and lowest RMSAE (0.57 D), while other new-generation formulas showed relatively worse performance (MAE: 0.46 to 0.67 D; RMSAE: 0.60 to 0.84 D). CONCLUSION: The Kane formula showed the highest accuracy in short eyes, whereas the Pearl-DGS had superior performance in eyes with a relatively shorter AL and deeper ACD. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI