PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

A O Khan

Publications and source records attributed to A O Khan.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

Paediatric secondary intraocular lens estimation from the aphakic refraction alone: comparison with a standard biometric technique.

AIM: To compare the following two methods of paediatric secondary posterior chamber intraocular lens (PCIOL) determination with the Holladay formula: (1) estimation from the aphakic refraction alone (using assumed keratometry (K) of 44 diopters); and (2) calculation based on preoperative measured biometry. METHODS: (1) Retrospective medical record review in a referral eye hospital of children with aphakia aged < or =12 years who underwent secondary PCIOL implantation with an Alcon MA60BM lens; (2) PCIOL determination for a plano refraction by the above two methods (estimation and calculation); and (3) prediction of pseudophakic refraction for the PCIOL actually implanted by the above two methods compared with the actual pseudophakic refraction. RESULTS: 50 eyes of 30 children with aphakia were studied. The estimated (mean, 95% confidence interval (CI)) secondary PCIOL values (25.81, +/-1.65 D) and the calculated secondary PCIOL values (26.35, +/-1.50 D) were not significantly different (mean absolute value of the difference 1.86 D, 95% CI +/-0.41 D) by the two-tailed paired t test at alpha = 0.05 (p = 0.11). For each eye, the pseudophakic refractions predicted by the two methods for the PCIOL that was actually implanted differed, both from each other and from the actual pseudophakic refraction (repeated-measures analysis of variance, p<0.001; Tukey test, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The method of PCIOL estimation from the aphakic refraction alone provides values similar to those obtained by a standard technique and can be useful if biometry is unavailable. Targeting a pseudophakic refraction in paediatric aphakia is prone to error.

Aphakia↗

Retinoscopic (refractive) estimation of axial length in paediatric aphakia: a comparison with ultrasonic measurement.

AIM: To compare paediatric axial length values estimated from the aphakic refraction alone with axial length values measured by ultrasound. METHODS: Retrospective institutional medical record review of paediatric aphakic patients 12 years of age and younger with documented ultrasonic axial length and objective refraction (retinoscopy) within 3 months of each other. An estimate of axial length was made from the aphakic refraction alone (with an assumed average keratometry value of 44 dioptres) for all patients. RESULTS: 149 eyes of 102 paediatric aphakic patients were identified. The ultrasonic axial length values (mean 22.47 mm, SD 1.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27) and estimated axial length values (mean 22.41 mm, SD 1.53, 95% CI 0.25) had an average difference of 0.05 mm (SD 1.04, 95% CI 0.17) and were not significantly different (p = 0.56) by the two tailed paired t test. A histogram of the differences that did exist between the two values resembled a normal distribution. The nine eyes with the largest differences between the two values had either low hyperopic aphakic refractions or abnormal average keratometry values. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between the two groups of axial length values, and the distribution of differences that did exist seemed random. The greatest differences between the two values occurred in longer (less hyperopic) eyes and in eyes with abnormally steep or flat keratometry. Estimation of axial length from the aphakic refraction alone seems to be a useful technique in the average paediatric eye, especially if biometry is unavailable.

Adolescent↗