Comparison of Ocular Biometry Using Low-Coherence Reflectometry with Other Devices for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation.
10.3341/jkos.2015.56.10.1558
- Author:
Ji Won KIM
1
;
Hoon LEE
;
Ji Won JUNG
;
Jin Sun KIM
;
Hyung Keun LEE
;
Kyoung Yul SEO
;
Eung Kweon KIM
;
Tae Im KIM
Author Information
1. The Institute of Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. taeimkim@gmail.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Axial length;
IOL-Master;
Keratometry;
Lenstar LS900;
Optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR)
- MeSH:
Biometry*;
Cataract;
Glycyrrhetinic Acid;
Humans;
Interferometry;
Lenses, Intraocular*;
Observational Study;
Prospective Studies;
Ultrasonography
- From:Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society
2015;56(10):1558-1565
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To compare axial length (AL) and keratometry (K) using optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR, Lenstar LS900(R), Haag-Streit, Bern, Switzerland) with current ocular biometry devices and evaluate the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation. METHODS: In this prospective, comparative observational study of eyes with cataracts, AL and K were measured using an OLCR device (Lenstar LS900(R), Haag-Streit), partial coherence interferometry (PCI, IOL Master(R), Carl Zeiss, Jena, Germany), A-scan (Eyecubed) and automated keratometry (KR-7100, Topcon, Tokyo, Japan). IOL power calculation was performed using the Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff (SRK/T) formula. The IOL prediction error (PE) was calculated by subtracting the predicted IOL power from the postoperative (PO) IOL power (PO 4 weeks, PO 12 weeks). RESULTS: A total of 50 eyes of 39 patients with cataracts (mean age 67.12 +/- 8.51 years) were evaluated in this study. AL and K were not significantly different between the OLCR device and other devices (analysis of variance [ANOVA], p = 0.946, 0.062, respectively). The mean PE in IOL power calculation was -0.22 +/- 0.50D with the OLCR device, 0.08 +/- 0.45D with the PCI device and -0.01 +/- 0.48D with A-scan and automated keratometry (ANOVA, p = 0.006). The highest percentage of eyes with PE smaller than +/- 0.5D was IOL Master(R) followed by Eyecubed and then Lenstar LS900(R). The mean absolute PE was not statistically significant among the 3 devices (ANOVA, p = 0.684). CONCLUSIONS: Ocular biometry measurements were comparable between the OLCR device and the PCI ultrasound device. However, the IOL power prediction showed significant differences among the 3 devices. Therefore, the differences in application of these devices should be considered.
