Top

Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology

Published in:

01-10-2020 | Cataract

Accuracy evaluation of objective refraction using the wavefront aberrometer in pseudophakic eyes

Authors: Min Hou, Yujie Ding, Liangping Liu, Yanxin Xu, Jianbing Li, Mingxing Wu

Published in: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology | Issue 10/2020

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the accuracy of wavefront-derived objective refraction in pseudophakic eyes.

Methods

Retrospective case series. A total of 356 eyes (356 patients) that underwent phacoemulsification and posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation were included. Noncycloplegic subjective manifest refraction (MR) and objective refraction results from the wavefront aberrometer were obtained and compared. Subgroup analysis of objective refraction at 2.6-mm zone was performed based on axial length (AL) and average keratometry.

Results

The biases (at the 2.6-mm, 3-mm, and 4-mm zones) were − 0.29 ± 0.37 D, − 0.53 ± 0.41 D, and − 0.51 ± 0.60 D for sphere; − 0.27 ± 0.36 D, − 0.52 ± 0.38 D, and − 0.53 ± 0.51 D for spherical equivalent (SE); 0.03 ± 0.20 D, 0.03 ± 0.22 D, and 0.04 ± 0.27 D for J₀; and 0.01 ± 0.16 D, 0.03 ± 0.22 D, and 0.01 ± 0.22 D for J₄₅, respectively. Objective refraction for sphere, SE, and J₀ (at 2.6 mm, 3 mm, and 4 mm) was significantly different from MR (P < 0.05), while J₄₅ values were equal. The objective refraction at 2.6 mm was the most accurate in short eyes (≤ 22.5 mm) with a minimum bias for SE (− 0.15 ± 0.28 D) and highest percentage of SE within ± 0.25 to ± 0.75 D of MR. However, there was no difference between the keratometry subgroups.

Conclusions

The wavefront aberrometer achieved the best accuracy at 2.6 mm in pseudophakic eyes with short AL. It still needs modification to be used as a substitute for MR in such patients.

Available only for authorised users

McGinnigle S, Naroo SA, Eperjesi F (2014) Evaluation of the auto-refraction function of the Nidek OPD-Scan III. Clin Exp Optom 97:160–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/cxo.12109CrossRefPubMed

Jinabhai A, O'Donnell C, Radhakrishnan H (2010) A comparison between subjective refraction and aberrometry-derived refraction in keratoconus patients and control subjects. Curr Eye Res 35:703–714. https://doi.org/10.3109/02713681003797921CrossRefPubMed

Shober HA, Dehler H, Kassel R (1970) Accommodation during observations with optical instruments. J Opt Soc Am 60:103–107. https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSA.60.000103CrossRef

Ghose S, Nayak BK, Singh JP (1986) Critical evaluation of the NR-1000F Auto Refractometer. Br J Ophthalmol 70:221–226. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.70.3.221CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Tsuneyoshi Y, Negishi K, Tsubota K (2017) Importance of accommodation and eye dominance for measuring objective refractions. Am J Ophthalmol 177:69–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2017.02.013CrossRefPubMed

Nissman SA, Tractenberg RE, Saba CM, Douglas JC, Lustbader JM (2006) Accuracy, repeatability, and clinical application of spherocylindrical automated refraction using time-based wavefront aberrometry measurements. Ophthalmology 113(577):e571–e572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.12.021CrossRef

Wang L, Misra M, Pallikaris LG, Koch DD (2002) Comparison of a ray-tracing refractometer, autorefractor, and computerized videokeratography in measuring pseudophakic eyes. J Cataract Refr Surg 28:276–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0886-3350(01)01103-8CrossRef

Melles RB, Holladay JT, Chang WJ (2018) Accuracy of intraocular lens calculation formulas. Ophthalmology 125:169–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.08.027CrossRefPubMed

Thibos LN, Wheeler W, Horner D (1997) Power vectors: an application of Fourier analysis to the description and statistical analysis of refractive error. Optom Vis Sci 74:367–375. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006324-199706000-00019CrossRefPubMed

10.

Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8CrossRefPubMed

11.

Shah S, Naroo S, Hosking S, Gherghel D, Mantry S, Bannerjee S, Pedwell K, Bains HS (2003) Nidek OPD-scan analysis of normal, keratoconic, and penetrating keratoplasty eyes. J Refract Surg 19:S255–S259. https://doi.org/10.3928/1081-597X-20030302-18CrossRefPubMed

12.

Perez-Straziota CE, Randleman JB, Stulting RD (2009) Objective and subjective preoperative refraction techniques for wavefront-optimized and wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 35:256–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.10.047CrossRefPubMed

13.

Gualdi L, Cappello V, Giordano C (2009) The use of NIDEK OPD Scan II wavefront aberrometry in toric intraocular lens implantation. J Refract Surg 25:S110–S115. https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20090115-06CrossRefPubMed

14.

Zhu R, Long KL, Wu XM, Li QD (2016) Comparison of the VISX wavescan and OPD-scan III with the subjective refraction. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 20:2988–2992PubMed

15.

Hamer CA, Buckhurst H, Purslow C, Shum GL, Habib NE, Buckhurst PJ (2016) Comparison of reliability and repeatability of corneal curvature assessment with six keratometers. Clin Exp Optom 99:583–589. https://doi.org/10.1111/cxo.12329CrossRefPubMed

16.

Asgari S, Hashemi H, Jafarzadehpur E, Mohamadi A, Rezvan F, Fotouhi A (2016) OPD-Scan III: a repeatability and inter-device agreement study of a multifunctional device in emmetropia, ametropia, and keratoconus. Int Ophthalmol 36:697–705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-016-0189-4CrossRefPubMed

17.

Kinge B, Midelfart A, Jacobsen G (1996) Clinical evaluation of the Allergan Humphrey 500 autorefractor and the Nidek AR-1000 autorefractor. Br J Ophthalmol 80:35–39. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.80.1.35CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Oyo-Szerenyi KD, Wienecke L, Businger U, Schipper I (1997) Autorefraction/autokeratometry and subjective refraction in untreated and photorefractive keratectomy-treated eyes. Arch Ophthalmol 115:157–164. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.1997.01100150159002CrossRefPubMed

19.

Bennett JR, Stalboerger GM, Hodge DO, Schornack MM (2015) Comparison of refractive assessment by wavefront aberrometry, autorefraction, and subjective refraction. J Optom 8:109–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2014.11.001CrossRefPubMed

20.

Toh T, Kearns LS, Scotter LW, Mackey DA (2005) Post-cycloplegia myopic shift in an older population. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 12:215–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/09286580590964784CrossRefPubMed

21.

Wang Y, Zhao KX, Jin Y, Niu YF, Zuo T (2003) Changes of higher order aberration with various pupil sizes in the myopic eye. J Refract Surg 19:S270–S274. https://doi.org/10.3928/1081-597X-20030302-21CrossRefPubMed

22.

Carkeet A, Velaedan S, Tan YK, Lee DY, Tan DT (2003) Higher order ocular aberrations after cycloplegic and non-cycloplegic pupil dilation. J Refract Surg 19:316–322. https://doi.org/10.3928/1081-597X-20030501-08CrossRefPubMed

Title: Accuracy evaluation of objective refraction using the wavefront aberrometer in pseudophakic eyes
Authors: Min Hou
Yujie Ding
Liangping Liu
Yanxin Xu
Jianbing Li
Mingxing Wu
Publication date: 01-10-2020
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology / Issue 10/2020
Print ISSN: 0721-832X
Electronic ISSN: 1435-702X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-020-04806-5

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Accuracy evaluation of objective refraction using the wavefront aberrometer in pseudophakic eyes

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2020

Anatomical and functional results of ILM peeling vs. non-peeling in macula-off rhegmatogenous retinal detachment

The effect of systemic erythropoietin and oral prednisolone on recent-onset non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy: a randomized clinical trial

Tracking postoperative head positioning in endothelial keratoplasty using a head positioning sensor

Etiopathogenesis of lacrimal sac mucopeptide concretions: insights from cinematic rendering techniques

Evaluation of retinal vessel quantity within individual retinal structural layers using optical coherence tomography angiography

Intensive care unit time and prolonged enucleation to processing interval are associated with donor cornea contamination