Comparison of ocular biometry and refractive outcome between ANTERION and IOL Master 700

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the comparability of ocular biometry measurements and refractive outcomes between ANTERION and IOL Master 700. Methods: This comparative prospective study was conducted from December 2020 to February 2021. A total of 225 patients who had cataracts were enrolled for the study and different parameters such as anterior keratometry (Steep K, Flat K) with axis, Sim K, central corneal thickness (CCT), aqueous depth (AQD), lens thickness (LT), and axial length (AL), white-to-white (WTW) were evaluated in IOL master 700 first and then with ANTERION. Finally, 203 patients completed the 6-week follow-up and the postoperative refraction was done at the 6 th week. To assess the agreement between the devices, intraclass coefficient (ICC) and Bland–Altman analysis with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) were used. To analyze the agreement for postoperative residual refractive error between the two devices, Kappa statistics were used. Results: The mean difference for steep K, flat K, and Sim K between ANTERION and IOL Master 700 were − 0.18 +/−0.26 D, −0.13+/− 0.28D, −0.15 +/−0.23, respectively. The CCT, ACD, and LT also showed excellent agreement (ICC > 0.9) but the similarity for the keratometry axis was not up to the mark (ICC = 0.794). For postoperative refractive outcomes, the Kappa value was 0.437, indicating moderate agreement. Conclusion: ANTERION showed a good agreement for the majority of parameters with IOLMaster 700 in measuring ocular biometry, except for the keratometry. The accuracy of the intraocular lens power calculations was clinically acceptable with both biometers though the IOL power given by ANTERION remained slightly on the hypermetropic side.

Clinical Evaluation of a New Spectral-Domain Optical Coherence Tomography-Based Biometer

“…Specifically, AL measurements are the average values of three scans in each of six meridians [ 5 ]. The reliability of this updated biometer has also been investigated and confirmed in previous studies [ 9 , 10 ].…”

“…Besides the evident advance in optical biometry in recent years, new systems are continuously being developed using different optical principles which must be clinically validated. Considering the IOL Master platform as the gold standard [ 3 ], as previously mentioned, most studies investigating the reliability of new optical biometers are based on comparisons with such platforms [ 4 , 5 , 6 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ]. Recently, a new optical biometer, VEMoS-AXL (CSO, Firenze, Italy), based on spectral-domain OCT (SD-OCT) has been developed.…”

Comparison between ANTERION and IOL MASTER 500 in Cataract Surgeries

“…SS-OCT was introduced in 2012, and since then its popularity has grown exponentially due to its remarkable advantages, resulting in the production of images of complex internal structures, such as those of the human eye, in a very high resolution. [7,[10][11][12][19][20][21]24,[27][28][29]. SS-OCT allows imaging of the vitreous, choroid, and retina, tissues that are small in size and therefore difficult to image, which is an advantage of primary importance in cataract surgery [19][20][21]25,[28][29][30].…”

“…[7,[10][11][12][19][20][21]24,[27][28][29]. SS-OCT allows imaging of the vitreous, choroid, and retina, tissues that are small in size and therefore difficult to image, which is an advantage of primary importance in cataract surgery [19][20][21]25,[28][29][30]. ANTERION uses a 1300 nm wavelength light source with a scan rate of 50,000 scans/sec, a scan depth of 14 mm and an axial resolution of 10 mm.…”

Evaluation of angle-to-angle and spur-to-spur using swept source optical coherence tomography in different refractive error

“…Second, reproducibility and reliability were not evaluated in the measurement of SS-OCT. However, the reproducibility and reliability of ANTERION SS-OCT has already been established in previous studies [ 5 , 26 , 42 – 44 ]. Additionally, we believe that the error that may occur was minimized due to the fact that all three acquisition quality parameters (“Motion,” “Fixation,” and “Tear film and lid”) were required to receive a "pass" result.…”