The rapid development of artificial intelligencein recent years has brought technological innovation to many fields. Artificial intelligence has shown great potential in the field of medicine. The specificity and accuracy of image interpretation and diagnosis assisted by artificial intelligence in some areas of diseases are comparable to human experts. Ophthalmology is a highly imaging-depended subject, such as fundus photography, optical coherence tomography, corneal topography, and so on, which is suitable for machine learning. Therefore many scholars are devoted to the application of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology. At present, most studies focus on retinal diseases. However in outpatient work, the number of patients with anterior ocular segment diseases is far more than that of patients with fundus diseases. This article aims to review the application of artificial intelligence in anterior ocular segment diseases.

To investigate the changes of intraocular biometrics and the selection of intraocular lens types after phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation.

A total of 60 cases (60 eyes) who received phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation from February 2016 to February 2018 in the Ophthalmology Department of Baotou Central Hospital of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region were studied. There were 33 males (33 eyes) and 27 females (27 eyes). The age ranged from 42 to 78 years, with an average of (60.8±10.2) years. According to the type of intraocular lens selected during surgery, all the cases included in this study were divided into two groups: Bigbag intraocular lens group and ReSTOR intraocular lens group. The visual acuity, the best corrected visual acuity, the distance from posterior capsule to retina, the length of eye axis, the depth of anterior chamber and intraocular pressure were examined before and after operation. Use (±s) to express. Bigbag intraocular lens group and ReSTOR intraocular lens group were compared by t test and paired t test.

There were no significant differences in age, sex, type of onset, lens nucleus hardness and complications between the two groups (t=1.89, χ²=1.32, 0.86, 0.76, 0.45; P>0.05). There was no significant difference in naked vision, best corrected vision, distance from posterior capsule to retina, axial length and intraocular pressure between the two groups before treatment (t=0.683, 0.432, 0.963, 0.862, 0.634; P>0.05). There was no significant difference in intraocular pressure between the two groups (t=0.031, 0.079, 0.091, 0.29; P>0.05). After treatment, the naked eye vision of the two groups was significantly improved compared with that before treatment (t=21.779, 13.326; P<0.05). After treatment, the naked eye vision of Bigbag intraocular lens group was significantly higher than that of ReSTOR intraocular lens group (t=5.136, P<0.05). The best corrected visual acuity of the two groups after treatment was significantly higher than that before treatment (t=13.689, 9.683; P<0.05). After treatment, the best corrected visual acuity of Bigbag intraocular lens group was significantly higher than that of ReSTOR intraocular lens group (t=3.679, P<0.05). After treatment, the distance from posterior capsule to retina was significantly increased compared with that before treatment (t=19.689, 12.683; P<0.05). After treatment, the distance from posterior capsule to retina in Bigbag intraocular lens group was significantly higher than that in ReSTOR intraocular lens group (t=2.924, P<0.05). The difference of naked vision, best corrected visual acuity, posterior capsular to retina distance between Bigbag intraocular lens group and ReSTOR intraocular lens group before and after surgery was significantly smaller than that of ReSTOR intraocular lens group (t=35.45, 27.25, 2.05; P<0.05). After treatment, compared with before treatment, the axial length of the two groups was significantly increased (t=15.249, 7.358; P<0.05). Axis length in Bigbag intraocular lens group was significantly longer than that in ReSTOR intraocular lens group (t=13.982, P<0.05). After treatment, the anterior chamber depth of the two groups was significantly deeper than before treatment (t=16.489, 8.0951; P<0.05). The anterior chamber depth of Bigbag intraocular lens group was significantly deeper than that of ReSTOR intraocular lens group (t=12.97, P<0.05). The difference of axial length and anterior chamber depth before and after operation in Bigbag intraocular lens group was significantly greater than that in ReSTOR intraocular lens group (t=8.45, 16.49; P<0.05).

After phacoemulsification combined with intraocular lens implantation, the intraocular biometric parameters such as naked eye vision, best corrected visual acuity, distance from posterior capsule to retina, axial length and anterior chamber depth changed, but intraocular pressure did not change significantly. Bigbag intraocular lens implantation in phacoemulsification combined with intraocular lens implantation has more advantages than ReSTOR intraocular lens implantation.

The limitations of corneal refractive surgery make phakic intraocular lens implantation more of a choice for doctors and patients. This article made a summary on the safety, efficacy, predictability, stability and postoperative complications of implantable collamer lens (ICL).