Double peak axial length measurement signal in cataract patients with epiretinal membrane
2
Issued Date
2023-04-01
Resource Type
ISSN
01655701
eISSN
15732630
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85138718319
Pubmed ID
36149619
Journal Title
International Ophthalmology
Volume
43
Issue
4
Start Page
1337
End Page
1343
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
International Ophthalmology Vol.43 No.4 (2023) , 1337-1343
Suggested Citation
Chonpimai P., Chirapapaisan C., Srivannaboon S., Loket S., Nujoi W., Dongngam S. Double peak axial length measurement signal in cataract patients with epiretinal membrane. International Ophthalmology Vol.43 No.4 (2023) , 1337-1343. 1343. doi:10.1007/s10792-022-02531-y Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/82355
Title
Double peak axial length measurement signal in cataract patients with epiretinal membrane
Author's Affiliation
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy of axial length (AL) measurement for intraocular lens (IOL) calculation in patients with cataract and epiretinal membrane (ERM). Methods: This prospective, cross-sectional study was performed in cataract patients with ERM. All subjects were sent for standard optical biometry, prepared for cataract surgery. Signals of AL measurement were detected as double peaks and recorded as AL1 (first peak), and AL2 (second peak). The IOL power was calculated from AL1 and AL2, and reported as IOL1 and IOL2. The IOL2 was chosen for cataract surgery in all cases. Postoperative predictive errors were compared between IOL1 and IOL2. Results: Thirty-seven eyes from 37 patients were included. Mean AL1 was significantly shorter than AL2 (23.13 ± 1.28 vs. 23.60 ± 1.34 mm, p < 0.001), resulting in higher power of IOL1 than IOL2 (mean difference was 1.53 ± 0.96 diopters, p < 0.001). At 3-months post-operation, twenty-nine eyes (78.4%) (95% CI 62.8%–88.6%) showed refractive error within ± 0.5 diopter and all eyes were within ± 1.0 diopter. Postoperative predictive errors including mean arithmetic error (ME) and mean absolute error (MAE) of IOL2 were significantly lower than those of IOL1 (ME: IOL1 vs. IOL2, −0.94 ± 0.91 vs. 0.08 ± 0.51; MAE: 0.97 ± 0.88 vs. 0.39 ± 0.33 diopter, all p < 0.001). Conclusions: AL measurement in ERM can be detected as a double peak signal during biometric measurement. The IOL power calculated from the first and second peak signals is significantly different. However, the IOL power derived from the second peak signal provides better refractive outcomes. The results suggest that the second peak signal represents an accurate AL measurement.