Comparison of Biometric Measurements and Refractive Results among Low-coherence Reflectometry, Partial Interferometry and Applanation Ultrasonography.
10.3341/jkos.2017.58.1.43
- Author:
Sung Hoon LEE
1
;
Hyung Keun LEE
Author Information
1. The Institute of Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. shadik@yuhs.ac
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
A-scan;
Intraocular lens;
IOL Master;
OA-2000;
Posterior subcapular cataract
- MeSH:
Anterior Chamber;
Biometry;
Cataract;
Classification;
Humans;
Interferometry*;
Lenses, Intraocular;
Refractive Errors;
Ultrasonography*
- From:Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society
2017;58(1):43-49
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To compare the measurement results and the accuracy of the predicted refractive error after cataract surgery among 3 ocular biometry devices; OA-2000®, IOL Master® and A-scan ultrasound in posterior subscapular cataracts. METHODS: Biometry measurements including axial length, anterior chamber depth and the keratometry of 80 cataractous eyes were measured using ultrasonography, OA-2000® and IOL Master®. To calculate the intraocular lens (IOL) power, the SRK/T formula was used and 3 months after cataract surgery, the refractive outcome was compared to the preoperatively predicted refractive error. RESULTS: The number of eyes measured by the 3 devices (A-scan, IOL Master® and OA-2000®) was 57 (group A) and the number of eyes measured by 2 devices (A-scan and OA-2000®) was 22 (group B). When cataract grading was performed based on the Lens Opacity Classification system III, the severity of posterior subscapular opacity was significantly different between the 2 groups (p = 0.001). Although no difference was observed in the measured biometry values including axial length, anterior chamber depth and keratometry in groups A and B, the predicted refractive error was significantly different in group B; OA-2000® showed a significantly higher accuracy in predicting IOL power than A-scan. CONCLUSIONS: In cataract patients whose posterior subscapular opacity is not severe, the accuracy for predicting refractive error after cataract surgery was not significantly different among the 3 devices included in our study (A-scan, IOL Master® and OA-2000®). However, in patients with severe posterior subscapular opacity, OA-2000®, that provides a Fourier domain light source-calculated predicted refractive error of IOL may be more accurate.
