8 resultados para Error Estimation
em Universidad de Alicante
Resumo:
To validate clinically an algorithm for correcting the error in the keratometric estimation of corneal power by using a variable keratometric index of refraction (nk) in a normal healthy population.
Resumo:
Purpose: To calculate theoretically the errors in the estimation of corneal power when using the keratometric index (nk) in eyes that underwent laser refractive surgery for the correction of myopia and to define and validate clinically an algorithm for minimizing such errors. Methods: Differences between corneal power estimation by using the classical nk and by using the Gaussian equation in eyes that underwent laser myopic refractive surgery were simulated and evaluated theoretically. Additionally, an adjusted keratometric index (nkadj) model dependent on r1c was developed for minimizing these differences. The model was validated clinically by retrospectively using the data from 32 myopic eyes [range, −1.00 to −6.00 diopters (D)] that had undergone laser in situ keratomileusis using a solid-state laser platform. The agreement between Gaussian (PGaussc) and adjusted keratometric (Pkadj) corneal powers in such eyes was evaluated. Results: It was found that overestimations of corneal power up to 3.5 D were possible for nk = 1.3375 according to our simulations. The nk value to avoid the keratometric error ranged between 1.2984 and 1.3297. The following nkadj models were obtained: nkadj= −0.0064286r1c + 1.37688 (Gullstrand eye model) and nkadj = −0.0063804r1c + 1.37806 (Le Grand). The mean difference between Pkadj and PGaussc was 0.00 D, with limits of agreement of −0.45 and +0.46 D. This difference correlated significantly with the posterior corneal radius (r = −0.94, P < 0.01). Conclusions: The use of a single nk for estimating the corneal power in eyes that underwent a laser myopic refractive surgery can lead to significant errors. These errors can be minimized by using a variable nk dependent on r1c.
Resumo:
The aim of this study was to obtain the exact value of the keratometric index (nkexact) and to clinically validate a variable keratometric index (nkadj) that minimizes this error. Methods: The nkexact value was determined by obtaining differences (DPc) between keratometric corneal power (Pk) and Gaussian corneal power (PGauss c ) equal to 0. The nkexact was defined as the value associated with an equivalent difference in the magnitude of DPc for extreme values of posterior corneal radius (r2c) for each anterior corneal radius value (r1c). This nkadj was considered for the calculation of the adjusted corneal power (Pkadj). Values of r1c ∈ (4.2, 8.5) mm and r2c ∈ (3.1, 8.2) mm were considered. Differences of True Net Power with PGauss c , Pkadj, and Pk(1.3375) were calculated in a clinical sample of 44 eyes with keratoconus. Results: nkexact ranged from 1.3153 to 1.3396 and nkadj from 1.3190 to 1.3339 depending on the eye model analyzed. All the nkadj values adjusted perfectly to 8 linear algorithms. Differences between Pkadj and PGauss c did not exceed 60.7 D (Diopter). Clinically, nk = 1.3375 was not valid in any case. Pkadj and True Net Power and Pk(1.3375) and Pkadj were statistically different (P , 0.01), whereas no differences were found between PGauss c and Pkadj (P . 0.01). Conclusions: The use of a single value of nk for the calculation of the total corneal power in keratoconus has been shown to be imprecise, leading to inaccuracies in the detection and classification of this corneal condition. Furthermore, our study shows the relevance of corneal thickness in corneal power calculations in keratoconus.
Resumo:
Purpose: The aim of this study was to analyze theoretically the errors in the central corneal power calculation in eyes with keratoconus when a keratometric index (nk) is used and to clinically confirm the errors induced by this approach. Methods: Differences (DPc) between central corneal power estimation with the classical nk (Pk) and with the Gaussian equation (PGauss c ) in eyes with keratoconus were simulated and evaluated theoretically, considering the potential range of variation of the central radius of curvature of the anterior (r1c) and posterior (r2c) corneal surfaces. Further, these differences were also studied in a clinical sample including 44 keratoconic eyes (27 patients, age range: 14–73 years). The clinical agreement between Pk and PGauss c (true net power) obtained with a Scheimpflug photography–based topographer was evaluated in such eyes. Results: For nk = 1.3375, an overestimation was observed in most cases in the theoretical simulations, with DPc ranging from an underestimation of 20.1 diopters (D) (r1c = 7.9 mm and r2c = 8.2 mm) to an overestimation of 4.3 D (r1c = 4.7 mm and r2c = 3.1 mm). Clinically, Pk always overestimated the PGauss c given by the topography system in a range between 0.5 and 2.5 D (P , 0.01). The mean clinical DPc was 1.48 D, with limits of agreement of 0.71 and 2.25 D. A very strong statistically significant correlation was found between DPc and r2c (r = 20.93, P , 0.01). Conclusions: The use of a single value for nk for the calculation of corneal power is imprecise in keratoconus and can lead to significant clinical errors.
Resumo:
AIM: To evaluate the prediction error in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation for a rotationally asymmetric refractive multifocal IOL and the impact on this error of the optimization of the keratometric estimation of the corneal power and the prediction of the effective lens position (ELP). METHODS: Retrospective study including a total of 25 eyes of 13 patients (age, 50 to 83y) with previous cataract surgery with implantation of the Lentis Mplus LS-312 IOL (Oculentis GmbH, Germany). In all cases, an adjusted IOL power (PIOLadj) was calculated based on Gaussian optics using a variable keratometric index value (nkadj) for the estimation of the corneal power (Pkadj) and on a new value for ELP (ELPadj) obtained by multiple regression analysis. This PIOLadj was compared with the IOL power implanted (PIOLReal) and the value proposed by three conventional formulas (Haigis, Hoffer Q and Holladay). RESULTS: PIOLReal was not significantly different than PIOLadj and Holladay IOL power (P>0.05). In the Bland and Altman analysis, PIOLadj showed lower mean difference (-0.07 D) and limits of agreement (of 1.47 and -1.61 D) when compared to PIOLReal than the IOL power value obtained with the Holladay formula. Furthermore, ELPadj was significantly lower than ELP calculated with other conventional formulas (P<0.01) and was found to be dependent on axial length, anterior chamber depth and Pkadj. CONCLUSION: Refractive outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of the multifocal IOL Lentis Mplus LS-312 can be optimized by minimizing the keratometric error and by estimating ELP using a mathematical expression dependent on anatomical factors.
Resumo:
Purpose: To evaluate the predictability of the refractive correction achieved with a positional accommodating intraocular lenses (IOL) and to develop a potential optimization of it by minimizing the error associated with the keratometric estimation of the corneal power and by developing a predictive formula for the effective lens position (ELP). Materials and Methods: Clinical data from 25 eyes of 14 patients (age range, 52–77 years) and undergoing cataract surgery with implantation of the accommodating IOL Crystalens HD (Bausch and Lomb) were retrospectively reviewed. In all cases, the calculation of an adjusted IOL power (PIOLadj) based on Gaussian optics considering the residual refractive error was done using a variable keratometric index value (nkadj) for corneal power estimation with and without using an estimation algorithm for ELP obtained by multiple regression analysis (ELPadj). PIOLadj was compared to the real IOL power implanted (PIOLReal, calculated with the SRK-T formula) and also to the values estimated by the Haigis, HofferQ, and Holladay I formulas. Results: No statistically significant differences were found between PIOLReal and PIOLadj when ELPadj was used (P = 0.10), with a range of agreement between calculations of 1.23 D. In contrast, PIOLReal was significantly higher when compared to PIOLadj without using ELPadj and also compared to the values estimated by the other formulas. Conclusions: Predictable refractive outcomes can be obtained with the accommodating IOL Crystalens HD using a variable keratometric index for corneal power estimation and by estimating ELP with an algorithm dependent on anatomical factors and age.
Resumo:
This paper deals with the estimation of a time-invariant channel spectrum from its own nonuniform samples, assuming there is a bound on the channel’s delay spread. Except for this last assumption, this is the basic estimation problem in systems providing channel spectral samples. However, as shown in the paper, the delay spread bound leads us to view the spectrum as a band-limited signal, rather than the Fourier transform of a tapped delay line (TDL). Using this alternative model, a linear estimator is presented that approximately minimizes the expected root-mean-square (RMS) error for a deterministic channel. Its main advantage over the TDL is that it takes into account the spectrum’s smoothness (time width), thus providing a performance improvement. The proposed estimator is compared numerically with the maximum likelihood (ML) estimator based on a TDL model in pilot-assisted channel estimation (PACE) for OFDM.