RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Nationwide multicentre comparison of preoperative biometry and predictability of cataract surgery in Japan
JF British Journal of Ophthalmology
JO Br J Ophthalmol
FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
SP bjophthalmol-2021-318825
DO 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2021-318825
A1 Kamiya, Kazutaka
A1 Hayashi, Ken
A1 Tanabe, Mao
A1 Tabuchi, Hitoshi
A1 Sato, Masaki
A1 Gotoh, Norihito
A1 Kojima, Takashi
A1 Hatsusaka, Natsuko
YR 2021
UL http://bjo.bmj.com/content/early/2021/06/09/bjophthalmol-2021-318825.abstract
AB Aim To compare the preoperative biometric data and the refractive accuracy of cataract surgery among major surgical sites in a nationwide multicentre study.Methods We prospectively obtained the preoperative biometric data of 2143 eyes of 2143 consecutive patients undergoing standard cataract surgery at major 12 facilities and compared the preoperative biometry as well as the postoperative refractive accuracy among them.Results We found significant differences in most preoperative variables, such as axial length (one-way analysis of variance, p=0.003), anterior chamber depth (p<0.001), lens thickness (p<0.001) and central corneal thickness (p<0.001), except for mean keratometry (p=0.587) and corneal astigmatism (p=0.304), among the 12 surgical sites. The prediction error using the Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff/Theoretical (SRK/T formula was significantly more hyperopic than that using the Barrett Universal II formula (paired t-test, p<0.001). The absolute error using the SRK/T formula was significantly larger than that using the Barrett Universal II formula (p=0.016). The prediction error using the SRK/T formula was significantly more hyperopic than that using the Barrett Universal II formula at 10 of 12 institutions, but significantly more myopic at one institution. The absolute error using the SRK/T formula was significantly larger than that using the Barrett Universal II formula at 4 of 12 institutions but significantly smaller at two institutions.Conclusions Regional divergences of the preoperative biometry were not necessarily negligible, and the optimised intraocular lens power calculation formula was individually different among the 12 facilities. Our findings highlight the importance of individual optimisation of these formulas at each facility, especially in consideration of these biometric variations.Trial registration numberClinical Trial Registry; 000039976.The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.