Perbandingan Absolute Prediction Error Pasca Fakoemulsifikasi Menggunakan Biometri Ultrasonik dan Biometri Optikal
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11594/ojkmi.v8i1.100Keywords:
Absolute Prediction Error, Biometri Optikal, Biometri Ultrasonik, Fakoemulsifikasi, RefraksiAbstract
Pendahuluan: Perkembangan teknik fakoemulsifikasi dan lensa intraokular (LIO) modern telah meningkatkan harapan pasien terhadap kualitas penglihatan pasca operasi yang optimal. Biometri ultrasonik dan optikal merupakan dua metode untuk menghitung panjang aksial dan parameter mata lainnya, yang berperan penting dalam menentukan ukuran LIO. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui perbandingan refraksi pasca fakoemulsifikasi menggunakan kedua biometri di BLUD UPT Klinik Mata Ambon Vlissingen.
Metode: Desain penelitian adalah eksperimen murni, melibatkan 72 pasien katarak yang dibagi secara acak ke kelompok biometri ultrasonik (n=36) dan optikal (n=36). Pemeriksaan refraksi dilakukan satu minggu pasca fakoemulsifikasi untuk menganalisis Absolute Prediction Error (APE) dengan uji statistik Independent T-test.
Hasil: Hasil penelitian menunjukkan rata-rata APE kelompok ultrasonik 0,57±0,33 D (range 0,08–1,23 D), diketahui 31 orang (86,1%) memiliki APE ≤1,00 D. Pada kelompok optikal, rata-rata APE 0,53±0,28 D (range 0,05–1,12 D), dengan 34 orang (94,4%) memiliki APE ≤1,00 D. Uji Independent T-test menunjukkan tidak terdapat perbedaan bermakna antara kedua kelompok (p=0,620).
Kesimpulan: Biometri optikal memberikan rata-rata APE lebih kecil dibandingkan ultrasonik, namun perbedaan tidak signifikan secara statistik. Kedua metode dapat digunakan dalam perhitungan daya LIO untuk mengoptimalkan refraksi pasca fakoemulsifikasi.
Downloads
References
Nizami AA, Gurnani B, Gulani AC. Cataract. [Updated 2024 Feb 27]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK539699/
World Health Organization. Blindness and vision impairment [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2026 Jan 3]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/blindness-and-visual-impairment
Rif’ati L. Rapid assessment of avoidable blindness dataset: Indonesia, Maluku (2016). London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine RAAB Repository; 2016
Mazhry Zu, Hassan F, Abdullah M, Asif L. Comparison of post-operative outcomes predicted by ultrasonic and optic biometry after phacoemulsification. Pakistan Journal of Ophthalmology. 2023;39(2):134–8
Sen S, Tripathy K. Ultrasound biometry. [Updated 2024 Jan 11]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK599551/
Song AL, Rizzuti A. Optical biometry. [Updated 2023 Apr 17]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK580549/
Ahmed AEMH, Ghany AEGIA el, Mostafa HAEG. Comparison between conventional ultrasound biometry and optical biometry in preoperative intraocular lens power calculation in cataractous emmetropic patients. Al-Azhar International Medical Journal. 2023;4(10):79–84
Muslim F, Barliana JD. Prediction errors and accuracy of intraocular lens (iol) calculation formulas in pediatric eyes. Ophthalmol Ina. 2020;46(2):175-81
Mandlik HR, Patil SR, Joshi AK, Tripathi AK. Study of accuracy of axial length measurements by two biometric methods with reference to postoperative sphericap equivalents in patients undergoing phacoemulsification. Indian Journal of Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology. 2020;6(4):595-9
Atwa FA, Kamel HS, Kamel RM. Refractive outcome after phacoemulsification using optical biometry versus immersion ultrasound biometry. The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine. 2019;75(5):2806-12
Pereira A, Popovic M, Lloyd JC, El-Defrawy S, Schlenker MB. Preoperative measurements for cataract surgery: a comparison of ultrasound and optical biometric devices. Int Ophthalmol. 2021 Apr;41(4):1521-30
An Y, Kang EK, Kim H, et al. Accuracy of swept-source optical coherence tomography based biometry for intraocular lens power calculation: a retrospective cross-sectional study. BMC Ophthalmology. 2019;19(1):1–7
Muslim F, Barliana JD. Prediction errors and accuracy of intraocular lens (iol) calculation formulas in pediatric eyes. Ophthalmol Ina. 2020;46(2):175-81
Paul M. Comparison of applanation ultrasound biometry with optical biometry for intraocular lens power estimation in cataract surgery and their impact on prediction error. Kerala J Ophthalmol. 2021;33:173–8
Miele A, Fumagalli C, Abbruzzese G, Savastano A, Rizzo S, Giansanti F, et al. Biometric refractive error after cataract and retina surgery: a systematic review and a benchmark proposal. Eye (Lond). 2021 Nov;35(11):3049-55
Charlesworth E, Alderson AJ, de Juan V, Elliott DB. When is refraction stable following routine cataract surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2020;40:531–539
Khan AM, Waldner DM, Luong M, Sanders E, Crichton ACS, Ford BA. Stabilization of refractive error and associated factors following small incision phacoemulsification cataract surgery. BMC Ophthalmol. 2022;22(1):13
Downloads
Submitted
Accepted
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Oftalmologi Jurnal Kesehatan Mata Indonesia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a 