Intraocular lens power calculation: Clinical comparison of 2 optical biometry devices

Rabsilber, Tanja M.; Jepsen, Charlotte; Auffarth, Gerd U.; Holzer, MP

doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.09.016

Cited by 86 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results reinforce earlier studies [10][11][12][13][14] reporting the strong agreement found between LENSTAR and IOLMaster in AL, average K, and IOL power. An exception is a recent study, 27 which reported less satisfactory average K agreement between IOLMaster and LENSTAR; the mean difference being 0.67 D, with 95% LoA given by (0.07, 1.20).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…9 Assessing method agreement can also be useful for evaluating the relative importance of instrument variation as a source of error for IOL power. Several studies [10][11][12][13][14] that look at LENSTAR-IOLMaster agreement in AL, anterior chamber depth (ACD), IOL power, K1, and K2 measurements of phakic eyes have been done. All suggest that measurements obtained from LENSTAR and IOLMaster strongly agree.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Agreement analysis of LENSTAR with other techniques of biometry

Jasvinder

Khang

Sarinder

et al. 2011

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To assess the agreement of the optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR) device LENSTAR LS900 with partial coherence interferometry (PCI) device IOLMaster and applanation and immersion ultrasound biometry. Methods We conducted the study at the Ophthalmology Clinic, University of Malaya Medical Center, Malaysia. Phakic eyes of 76 consecutive cataract patients were measured using four different methods: IOLMaster, LENSTAR and A-scan applanation and immersion ultrasound biometry. We assessed the method agreement in the LENSTARIOLMaster, LENSTAR-applanation, and LENSTAR-immersion comparisons for axial length (AL) and intraocular lens (IOL) power using Bland-Altman plots. For average K, we compared LENSTAR with IOLMaster and the TOPCON KR-8100 autorefractor-keratometer. SRK/T formula was used to compute IOL power, with emmetropia as the target refractive outcome. Results For all the variables studied, LENSTAR agreement with IOLMaster is strongest, followed by those with immersion and applanation. For the LENSTARIOLMaster comparison, the estimated proportion of differences falling within 0.33 mm from zero AL and within 1D from zero IOL power is 100%. The estimated proportion of differences falling within 0.5 D from zero average K is almost 100% in the LENSTAR-IOLMaster comparison but 88% in the LENSTAR-TOPCON comparison. The proportion of differences falling within 0.10 mm (AL) and within 1D (IOL power) in the LENSTAR-IOLMaster comparison has practically significant discrepancy with that of LENSTAR-applanation and LENSTARimmersion comparisons.Conclusions In phakic eyes of cataract patients, measurements of AL, average K, and IOL power calculated using the SRK/T formula from LENSTAR are biometrically equivalent to those from IOLMaster, but not with those from applanation and immersion ultrasound biometry.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agreement analysis of LENSTAR with other techniques of biometry

Jasvinder

Khang

Sarinder

et al. 2011

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Keratometric measurements obtained with IOLMaster have been shown to have a high agreement with LENSTAR (Haag-Streit, Bern, Switzerland) [8][9][10][11], different AKR devices [12,13], manual keratometers [14], Galilei Dual Scheimpflug Analyzer (GDSA) (Ziemer Group, Port, Switzerland) [12], and the Sirius Scheimpflug/Placido photography-based topography system (CSO, Italy) [15]. However, other studies reported that the IOLMaster gives significantly steeper corneal power values than the manual keratometer, Pentacam, and certain automated keratometers [2,13,16,17].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Comparison of keratometric measurements obtained by the Verion Image Guided System with optical biometry and auto-keratorefractometer

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare the keratometric measurements of Verion Image Guided System with an optical biometer (Zeiss IOLMaster 500, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany) and an automated keratorefractometer (AKR) (Topcon KR-8900, Topcon, Japan). In this prospective clinical trial, the right eyes of 52 patients with cataract were examined (mean age 62.25 ± 12.16 years). The measurements were taken by the three systems in a random order. Keratometric data, magnitude of astigmatism, and astigmatic axis measurements from all three instruments were compared. The results were evaluated using, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), Bland-Altman plots, and paired samples t tests. The mean flat/steep K of Verion, IOLMaster, and AKR were 43.22 ± 1.38D/44.23 ± 1.46D, 43.07 ± 1.26D/44.05 ± 1.34D, and 43.07 ± 1.31D/43.89 ± 1.42D, respectively. Flat K readings of Verion were higher than IOLMaster and AKR (p < 0.05 for both). Steep K readings were different for all three (p < 0.05). The magnitude of astigmatism by Verion and IOLMaster were 0.98 ± 0.65D and 0.98 ± 0.59D (p = 0.88). The mean astigmatism measured by the AKR was 0.82 ± 0.62D, less than the other two instruments (p < 0.001). Astigmatic axis measurements of Verion and AKR differed <10° in 38, between 10° and 20° in 5, and >20° in 9 eyes; the same difference was 30, 11, and 11 eyes, respectively, between Verion and IOLMaster. Although, keratometric and astigmatic results obtained from Verion were not completely interchangeable with IOLMaster and AKR, especially the agreement between Verion and IOLMaster was excellent with ICCs close to one. However, there were pronounced astigmatic axis measurement differences between three instruments.

show abstract

“…When SRK II, Hoffer Q, and Haigis formulas were used for IOL power calculation the difference between the Lenstar and IOLMaster were within 0.5D in 96, 95, and 87% of measurements, respectively, and were not considered to be clinically significant [7]. In cataractous eyes, the mean differences in IOL power calculation using SRK II, SRK/T, Holladay, and Haigis formulas as evidenced by Rabsilber et al demonstrated an overall mean of 91.0% ± 2.2% of patients within ± 0.50 D [28]. In healthy subjects, differences of calculated IOL power based on the SRK/T formula ranged from 0.20 D to 0.34 D in 95% of observations, depending on AL of the eye as evidenced by Cruysberg and colleagues [8].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Considering difference in AL measurements between two Table 4 Summary of agreement between applanation ultrasound and the Lenstar for observer 2 *LoA=limits of agreement laser biometers the IOLMaster and the Lenstar LS 900®, an excellent agreement was found in both cataract [7,10,11,28] and healthy eyes [2,8,10]. However, the OLCR measurements differed from the PCLI measurements with mean differences of +0.026 mm [10], +0.01 mm [7], +0.00 mm [28], and -0.03 mm [11] in cataract eyes and +0.01 mm [2], +0.023 mm [10], +0.03 mm [8] in healthy eyes. These differences in AL measurements between two laser biometers were statistically significant, but clinical relevance of these differences was insignificant [7,8,10,11].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of optical low-coherence reflectometry and applanation ultrasound biometry on intraocular lens power calculation

Rončević¹,

Bušić²,

Čima³

et al. 2010

Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on excellent repeatability of the Lenstar and acceptable repeatability of applanation ultrasound, two techniques may be used interchangeably. The predicted refractive error of ± 0.20 D in 95% of the observations has never been achieved. Optical low-coherence reflectometry might become a new standard method for biometric measurement needed for intraocular lens-power calculation in patients with cataract.

show abstract

Intraocular lens power calculation: Clinical comparison of 2 optical biometry devices

Abstract: The OLCR biometry device provided precise and valid measurements and thus can be used for the preoperative examination of cataract patients.

Cited by 86 publications

References 20 publications

Agreement analysis of LENSTAR with other techniques of biometry

Agreement analysis of LENSTAR with other techniques of biometry

Comparison of keratometric measurements obtained by the Verion Image Guided System with optical biometry and auto-keratorefractometer

Comparison of optical low-coherence reflectometry and applanation ultrasound biometry on intraocular lens power calculation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About