目的：比较Alcon Acrysof IQ PanOptix TFNT00 (PanOptix)晶状体常数优化前后对人工晶状体(intraocular lens,IOL)度数计算准确性的影响，以及不同眼轴长度晶状体常数优化的效果。方法：回顾性收集2021年6月—2022年3月在上海爱尔眼科医院行白内障超声乳化手术联合植入PanOptix IOL患者的术前眼球生物学测量参数、植入IOL度数和术后1~3个月的显然验光结果。联合SRK/T、Hoffer Q、Holladay 1、Haigis公式，通过回归法计算优化的晶状体常数A、pACD、SF，通过多元线性回归计算优化的晶状体常数a0、a1和a2。观察晶状体常数优化前后平均绝对预测误差值(mean absolute error,MAE)及中位绝对预测误差值(median absolute error,MedAE)，预测误差在±0.25、±0.50、±0.75、±1.00 D以内的百分比的差异，评价晶状体常数优化对IOL计算准确性的影响。随后，按照眼轴长度进行分组(非高度近视组：<26.00 mm; 高度近视组：≥26.00 mm)，比较非高度近视组和高度近视组优化晶状体常数的差异。结果：共92眼(54位患者)纳入研究。优化前的晶状体常数A、pACD、SF、a0、a1和a2分别为119.1、5.63、1.83、1.39、0.40和0.10；优化后分别为119.35、6.14、2.36、?3.42，0.12和0.34。在全部眼轴组，晶状体常数优化前，SRK/T、Hoffer Q、Holladay 1、Haigis公式的MAE值分别为0.44、0.50、0.54、0.46 D；优化后，MAE值分别为0.43、0.54、0.51、0.35 D，其中Haigis公式优化前后比较差异有统计学意义(P=0.001)。在非高度近视组，晶状体常数优化前，4条公式的MAE值分别为0.46、0.40、0.40、0.42 D；优化后，MAE值分别为0.46 D、0.38 D、0.39 D、0.38 D，比较差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。在高度近视组，晶状体常数优化前，4条公式的MAE值分别为0.42、0.59、0.66、0.50 D；优化后，MAE值分别为0.36、0.48、0.47、0.31 D，其中Holladay 1和Haigis公式优化前后比较差异有统计学意义(P 分别为 0.020、0.002)。结论：PanOptix IOL的晶状体常数优化可以提高IOL度数计算的准确性，在高度近视组中比非高度近视组中优化意义更大。

Objective: To assess the benefits of intraocular lens (IOL) constant optimization of Alcon Acrysof IQ PanOptix TFNT00 (PanOptix) on the accuracy of IOL power calculation, and the effects of constant optimization between different axial length (AL) groups were further compared. Methods: Patients who underwent phacoemulsification and implantation with PanOptix IOL between June, 2021 and March, 2022 were included in this retrospective study. The preoperative biological ocular parameters, implanted IOL power, and subjective 1-3 months postoperative refraction were collected. Combined with SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1 and Haigis formulas, the optimized IOL constant A, surgeon factor (SF), post-surgery anterior chamber depth (pACD), and a0, a1, a2 were back-calculated. Refractive outcomes using optimized IOL constants were re-calculated combined with the corresponding formulas. Compare the mean absolute error (MAE), medium absolute error (MedAE) and percentage of eyes with IOL prediction errors (PE) within ±0.25, ±0.50, ±0.75 and ±1.00 (diopter)D when using the optimized constants and the manufacture constants. Patients were divided into two groups according to AL (non-high myopia: <26.0 mm; high myopia: ≥26 mm), compare the difference of IOL constant optimization between AL subgroups. Results: A total of 92 eyes of 54 patients were enrolled. The manufacture lens constant of A, pACD, SF, a0, a1 and a2 are respectively 119.1, 5.63, 1.83, 1.39, 0.4 and 0.1; and the optimized values are respectively 119.35, 6.14, 2.36, ?3.42, 0.12 and 0.34. In all patients group, with manufacture lens constant, the MAE values of SRKT, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1 and Haigis formula are 0.44, 0.50, 0.54, 0.46 D; with optimized lens constants, the MAE values are 0.43, 0.54, 0.51, 0.35 D, and there is a statistical difference of Haigis formula after optimization (P=0.001). In non-high myopia group, with manufacture lens constant, the MAE values are 0.46, 0.40, 0.40, 0.42 D; with optimized lens constants, the MAE values are0.46, 0.38, 0.39, 0.38 D, and no statistical difference has been found(P>0.05). In high myopia group, with manufacture lens constant, the MAE values are 0.42, 0.59, 0.66, 0.50 D; with optimized lens constants, the MAE values are 0.36, 0.48, 0.47, 0.31 D, and there are statistical differences of Holladay 1 and Haigis formula after optimization (P = 0.020, 0.002). Conclusion: IOL constant optimization of PanOptix IOL can improve the accuracy of IOL calculation, which is more significant in the high myopia group.