Evaluation of ocular biometry in primary angle-closure disease with two swept source optical coherence tomography devices

Abstract

Purpose To investigate agreement between 2 swept source OCT biometers, IOL Master700 and Anterion, in various ocular biometry and intraocular lens (IOL) calculations of primary angle-closure disease (PACD). Setting Rajavithi Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. Design Prospective comparative study. Methods This study conducted in a tertiary eye care center involving biometric measurements obtained with 2 devices in phakic eye with diagnosis of PACD. Mean difference and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) with confidence limits were assessed, and calculations of estimated residual refraction of the IOL were analysed using Barrett’s formula. Results Sixty-nine eyes from 45 PACD patients were enrolled for the study. Excellent agreement of various parameters was revealed, with ICC (confidence limits) of K1 = 0.953 (0.861–0.979), K2 = 0.950 (0.778–0.98), ACD = 0.932 (0.529–0.978), WTW = 0.775 (0.477–0.888), and LT = 0.947 (0.905–0.97). Mean difference of axial length (AL) was -0.01 ± 0.02 mm with ICC of 1.000. IOL calculation was assessed with Barrett’s formula, and Bland-Altman plot showed excellent agreement in the results of the 2 devices for the IOL power and estimated post-operative residual refraction (EPR). Conclusions Mean differences of biometric parameters, obtained with IOL Master700 and Anterion, were small, and ICC showed excellent concordance. No clinical relevance in calculation of IOL power was found, and the two devices appeared to be comparably effective in clinical practice.

A systemic review and network meta-analysis of accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation formulas in primary angle-closure conditions

“…But all these conclusions should be drawn with care as none of the comparison appeared statistically significant. For network meta-analysis, BUII achieved better postoperative outcomes than other formulae based on MAE, consistent with previous studies and current clinical experience [8]. However, BUII and some other seemingly preferable formulas like RBF 3.0 and LSF had relatively wide confidence intervals, indicating their instability when applied for PAC/PACG eyes.…”

“…Along with well-accepted precision of ocular biometry, accuracy of manufacturer IOL power quality control and the now-mature surgical techniques, the accuracy of IOL power calculation becomes the most essential factor for achieving the target refraction post-operatively. A dozen formulas for IOL power calculation have been established with diverse core principles on the basis of normal eyes since 1980s, yet the accuracy varies [7][8][9]. Theoretically, it could be well imagined that discrepancies in IOL prediction would occur when these formulas, especially regressive ones [10], were applied to special population with unusual ocular biometric parameters, e.g., significantly shallow anterior chamber (AC), thick lens and short axial length (AL) [11][12][13].…”

Ocular Biometry Features and Their Relationship with Anterior and Posterior Segment Lengths among a Myopia Population in Northern China

“…The IOLMaster 700, which is based on swept-source OCT, offers an image-based measurement that shows the entire longitudinal section of the eye. We conducted a thorough examination where we precisely measured the ASL and PSL using the IOLMaster 700 [13,14].…”