Comparison of Refractive Power and Astigmatism between Digital Keratometer and Autorefractor.
10.3341/jkos.2017.58.1.21
- Author:
Jae Won CHOI
1
;
Sang Youp HAN
;
Kyung Heon LEE
Author Information
1. Sungmo Eye Hospital, Busan, Korea. medicalhan@daum.net
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Astigmatism;
Autorefractor;
Corneal refraction;
Digital marker;
VERION®
- MeSH:
Astigmatism*;
Biometry;
Humans;
Lenses, Intraocular;
Medical Records;
Retrospective Studies
- From:Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society
2017;58(1):21-26
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To compare the corneal refraction, astigmatism, and corneal marking for toric intraocular lens measured with a VERION® Image Guided System and an autorefractor in order to precisely determine the toric intraocular lens target. METHODS: The medical records of 29 eyes of 29 patients were retrospectively reviewed to compare the corneal refraction, axis, and amount of astigmatism measured with a VERION® Image Guided System and an autorefractor. We compared the difference in marked axis for toric intraocular lenses as measured by a VERION Digital Marker and a manual marker. RESULTS: The average corneal refraction and amount of astigmatism were greater with the VERION® Image Guided System than with the autorefractor. The average difference in axis of astigmatism was 9.62°. The difference in axis of astigmatism in patients with more than 1.0 D of astigmatism (18 eyes) was 2.82 ± 2.27°, while that in patients with less than 1.0 D of astigmatism (11 eyes) was 20.27 ± 28.14°. The average difference in marked axis for toric intraocular lens measured by the VERION® Digital Marker and manual marker was 2.50° (0°-9.27°). CONCLUSIONS: The corneal refraction and amount of astigmatism were significantly higher with the VERION® Image Guided System, so careful concern and comparison of surgical outcomes between the two devices is needed in biometry.
