Cargando…

Comparison of 2 modern swept-source optical biometers—IOLMaster 700 and Anterion

PURPOSE: To compare biometric measures from 2 modern swept-source OCT biometers (IOLMaster700 (Z, Carl-Zeiss-Meditec) and Anterion (H, Heidelberg Engineering)) and evaluate the effect of measurement differences on the resulting lens power (IOLP). METHODS: Biometric measurements were made on a large...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Langenbucher, Achim, Szentmáry, Nóra, Cayless, Alan, Wendelstein, Jascha, Hoffmann, Peter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10049935/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36307658
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00417-022-05870-9
_version_ 1785014570609278976
author Langenbucher, Achim
Szentmáry, Nóra
Cayless, Alan
Wendelstein, Jascha
Hoffmann, Peter
author_facet Langenbucher, Achim
Szentmáry, Nóra
Cayless, Alan
Wendelstein, Jascha
Hoffmann, Peter
author_sort Langenbucher, Achim
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare biometric measures from 2 modern swept-source OCT biometers (IOLMaster700 (Z, Carl-Zeiss-Meditec) and Anterion (H, Heidelberg Engineering)) and evaluate the effect of measurement differences on the resulting lens power (IOLP). METHODS: Biometric measurements were made on a large study population with both instruments. We compared axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT) and corneal front and back surface curvature measurements. Corneal curvature was converted to power vectors and total power derived using the Gullstrand formula. A paraxial lens power calculation formula and a prediction for the IOL axial position according to the Castrop formula were used to estimate differences in IOLP targeting for emmetropia. RESULTS: There were no systematic differences between measurements of AL (− 0.0146 ± 0.0286 mm) and LT (0.0383 ± 0.0595 mm), whereas CCT yielded lower (7.8 ± 6.6 µm) and ACD higher (0.1200 ± 0.0531 mm) values with H. With H, CCT was lower for thicker corneas. The mean corneal front surface radius did not differ (− 0.4 ± 41.6 µm), but the corneal back surface yielded a steeper radius (− 397.0 ± 74.6 µm) with H, giving lower mean total power (− 0.3469 ± 0.2689 dpt). The astigmatic vector components in 0°/90° and 45°/135° were the same between both instruments for the front/back surface or total power. CONCLUSION: The biometric measures used in standard formulae (AL, corneal front surface curvature/power) are consistent between instruments. However, modern formulae involving ACD, CCT or corneal back surface curvature may yield differences in IOLP, and therefore, formula constant optimisation customised to the biometer type is required.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10049935
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100499352023-03-30 Comparison of 2 modern swept-source optical biometers—IOLMaster 700 and Anterion Langenbucher, Achim Szentmáry, Nóra Cayless, Alan Wendelstein, Jascha Hoffmann, Peter Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Cataract PURPOSE: To compare biometric measures from 2 modern swept-source OCT biometers (IOLMaster700 (Z, Carl-Zeiss-Meditec) and Anterion (H, Heidelberg Engineering)) and evaluate the effect of measurement differences on the resulting lens power (IOLP). METHODS: Biometric measurements were made on a large study population with both instruments. We compared axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT) and corneal front and back surface curvature measurements. Corneal curvature was converted to power vectors and total power derived using the Gullstrand formula. A paraxial lens power calculation formula and a prediction for the IOL axial position according to the Castrop formula were used to estimate differences in IOLP targeting for emmetropia. RESULTS: There were no systematic differences between measurements of AL (− 0.0146 ± 0.0286 mm) and LT (0.0383 ± 0.0595 mm), whereas CCT yielded lower (7.8 ± 6.6 µm) and ACD higher (0.1200 ± 0.0531 mm) values with H. With H, CCT was lower for thicker corneas. The mean corneal front surface radius did not differ (− 0.4 ± 41.6 µm), but the corneal back surface yielded a steeper radius (− 397.0 ± 74.6 µm) with H, giving lower mean total power (− 0.3469 ± 0.2689 dpt). The astigmatic vector components in 0°/90° and 45°/135° were the same between both instruments for the front/back surface or total power. CONCLUSION: The biometric measures used in standard formulae (AL, corneal front surface curvature/power) are consistent between instruments. However, modern formulae involving ACD, CCT or corneal back surface curvature may yield differences in IOLP, and therefore, formula constant optimisation customised to the biometer type is required. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-10-29 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10049935/ /pubmed/36307658 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00417-022-05870-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Cataract
Langenbucher, Achim
Szentmáry, Nóra
Cayless, Alan
Wendelstein, Jascha
Hoffmann, Peter
Comparison of 2 modern swept-source optical biometers—IOLMaster 700 and Anterion
title Comparison of 2 modern swept-source optical biometers—IOLMaster 700 and Anterion
title_full Comparison of 2 modern swept-source optical biometers—IOLMaster 700 and Anterion
title_fullStr Comparison of 2 modern swept-source optical biometers—IOLMaster 700 and Anterion
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of 2 modern swept-source optical biometers—IOLMaster 700 and Anterion
title_short Comparison of 2 modern swept-source optical biometers—IOLMaster 700 and Anterion
title_sort comparison of 2 modern swept-source optical biometers—iolmaster 700 and anterion
topic Cataract
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10049935/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36307658
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00417-022-05870-9
work_keys_str_mv AT langenbucherachim comparisonof2modernsweptsourceopticalbiometersiolmaster700andanterion
AT szentmarynora comparisonof2modernsweptsourceopticalbiometersiolmaster700andanterion
AT caylessalan comparisonof2modernsweptsourceopticalbiometersiolmaster700andanterion
AT wendelsteinjascha comparisonof2modernsweptsourceopticalbiometersiolmaster700andanterion
AT hoffmannpeter comparisonof2modernsweptsourceopticalbiometersiolmaster700andanterion