OPERASI KATARAK

38 APACRS Prinsip-prinsip Petunjuk Teknis Operasi Katarak 116. Ong HS, Evans JR, Allan BD. Accommodative intraocular lens versus standard monofocal intraocular lens implantation in cataract surgery. Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews. 2014, Issue 5. Art. No.: CD009667. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009667.pub2. 117. Takakura A, Iyer P, Adams JR, Pepin SM. Functional assessment of accommodating intraocular lenses versus monofocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: meta-analysis. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery . 2010;36:380-8. 118. Greenstein S, Pineda R 2nd. The quest for spectacle independence: A comparison of multifocal intraocular lens implants and pseudophakic monovision for patients with presbyopia. Seminars in Ophthalmology . 2017;32:111-115. 119. Findl O, Kriechbaum K, Sacu S, et al. Influence of operator experience on the performance of ultrasound biometry compared to optical biometry before cataract surgery. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery . 2003;29:1950-5. 120. Connors R 3rd, Boseman P 3rd, Olson RJ. Accuracy and reproducibility of biometry using partial coherence interferometry. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery . 2002;28:235-8. 121. Eleftheriadis H. IOLMaster biometry: refractive results of 100 consecutive cases. British Journal of Ophthalmology . 2003;87:960-3. 122. Haigis W, Lege B, Miller N, Schneider B. Comparison of immersion ultrasound biometry and partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens calculation according to Haigis. Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology . 2000;238:765-73. 123. Packer M, Fine IH, Hoffman RS, et al. Immersion A-scan compared with partial coherence interferometry: outcomes analysis. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery . 2002;28:239-42. 124. Landers J, Goggin M. Comparison of refractive outcomes using immersion ultrasound biometry and IOLMaster biometry. Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology . 2009;37:566-9. 125. Shammas HJ. A comparison of immersion and contact techniques for axial length measurement. Journal of the American Intraocular Implant Society . 1984;10:444-7. 126. Schelenz J, Kammann J. Comparison of contact and immersion techniques for axial length measurement and implant power calculation. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery . 1989;15:425-8. 127. Olsen T, Nielsen PJ. Immersion versus contact technique in the measurement of axial length by ultrasound. Acta Ophthalmologica (Copenhagen). 1989;67:101-2. 128. Hoffer KJ. The Hoffer Q formula: a comparison of theoretic and regression formulas. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 1993;19:700-12. Erratum. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery . 1994;20:677. 129. Zuberbuhler B, Morrell AJ. Errata in printed Hoffer Q formula. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery . 2007;33:2; author reply 2-3. 130. Hoffer KJ. Clinical results using the Holladay 2 intraocular lens power formula. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery . 2000;26:1233-7. 131. Olsen T, Corydon L, Gimbel H. Intraocular lens power calculation with an improved anterior chamber depth prediction algorithm. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery . 1995;21:313-9. REFERENSI