Cargando…
Evaluation of three biometric devices: ocular parameters and calculated intraocular lens power
Cataract surgery is among the most common medical procedures, and accurate ocular biometry measurements are key for successful visual outcome. The current study evaluated data obtained by the Eyestar 900, Anterion, IOLMaster700 biometers and the Pentacam corneal topographer. Compared values were axi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9663510/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36376354 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24017-8 |
_version_ | 1784830894754758656 |
---|---|
author | Lender, Rivkah Mirsky, Devora Greenberger, Riki Boim, Zipora Ben-Yaakov, Lee Kashtan, Chaya Naffar, Ibrahim Shine, Shira Chowers, Itay Ben-Eli, Hadas |
author_facet | Lender, Rivkah Mirsky, Devora Greenberger, Riki Boim, Zipora Ben-Yaakov, Lee Kashtan, Chaya Naffar, Ibrahim Shine, Shira Chowers, Itay Ben-Eli, Hadas |
author_sort | Lender, Rivkah |
collection | PubMed |
description | Cataract surgery is among the most common medical procedures, and accurate ocular biometry measurements are key for successful visual outcome. The current study evaluated data obtained by the Eyestar 900, Anterion, IOLMaster700 biometers and the Pentacam corneal topographer. Compared values were axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD), steep- and flat-K, cylinder and axis. Clinical impact was assessed by calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power using the mean values of every parameter and the Barrett and Kane formulas, stratified by device and amount of cylinder. IOL was re-calculated for each device substituting Pentacam K-values. This study included 196 eyes (98 participants) of cataract surgery candidates. When comparing the IOLMaster to the Eyestar (157 eyes), no difference was found in mean AL or ACD measurements (P > 0.05). Steep-K measurements differed between these devices and the Pentacam (P = 0.01). AL and ACD measurements differed between the IOLMaster and Anterion (38 eyes; P < 0.05). Strong correlations (range 0.72–0.99) were found between all four devices. Bland–Altman analysis demonstrated excellent agreement between biometry devices other than ACD between the IOLMaster and Eyestar. Calculated IOL power was 0.50–1.00 diopter (D) lower with the IOLMaster. Cylinder power was 0.75D higher in all biometers when Pentacam K-values were substituted. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9663510 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96635102022-11-15 Evaluation of three biometric devices: ocular parameters and calculated intraocular lens power Lender, Rivkah Mirsky, Devora Greenberger, Riki Boim, Zipora Ben-Yaakov, Lee Kashtan, Chaya Naffar, Ibrahim Shine, Shira Chowers, Itay Ben-Eli, Hadas Sci Rep Article Cataract surgery is among the most common medical procedures, and accurate ocular biometry measurements are key for successful visual outcome. The current study evaluated data obtained by the Eyestar 900, Anterion, IOLMaster700 biometers and the Pentacam corneal topographer. Compared values were axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD), steep- and flat-K, cylinder and axis. Clinical impact was assessed by calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power using the mean values of every parameter and the Barrett and Kane formulas, stratified by device and amount of cylinder. IOL was re-calculated for each device substituting Pentacam K-values. This study included 196 eyes (98 participants) of cataract surgery candidates. When comparing the IOLMaster to the Eyestar (157 eyes), no difference was found in mean AL or ACD measurements (P > 0.05). Steep-K measurements differed between these devices and the Pentacam (P = 0.01). AL and ACD measurements differed between the IOLMaster and Anterion (38 eyes; P < 0.05). Strong correlations (range 0.72–0.99) were found between all four devices. Bland–Altman analysis demonstrated excellent agreement between biometry devices other than ACD between the IOLMaster and Eyestar. Calculated IOL power was 0.50–1.00 diopter (D) lower with the IOLMaster. Cylinder power was 0.75D higher in all biometers when Pentacam K-values were substituted. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-11-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9663510/ /pubmed/36376354 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24017-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This 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 | Article Lender, Rivkah Mirsky, Devora Greenberger, Riki Boim, Zipora Ben-Yaakov, Lee Kashtan, Chaya Naffar, Ibrahim Shine, Shira Chowers, Itay Ben-Eli, Hadas Evaluation of three biometric devices: ocular parameters and calculated intraocular lens power |
title | Evaluation of three biometric devices: ocular parameters and calculated intraocular lens power |
title_full | Evaluation of three biometric devices: ocular parameters and calculated intraocular lens power |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of three biometric devices: ocular parameters and calculated intraocular lens power |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of three biometric devices: ocular parameters and calculated intraocular lens power |
title_short | Evaluation of three biometric devices: ocular parameters and calculated intraocular lens power |
title_sort | evaluation of three biometric devices: ocular parameters and calculated intraocular lens power |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9663510/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36376354 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24017-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lenderrivkah evaluationofthreebiometricdevicesocularparametersandcalculatedintraocularlenspower AT mirskydevora evaluationofthreebiometricdevicesocularparametersandcalculatedintraocularlenspower AT greenbergerriki evaluationofthreebiometricdevicesocularparametersandcalculatedintraocularlenspower AT boimzipora evaluationofthreebiometricdevicesocularparametersandcalculatedintraocularlenspower AT benyaakovlee evaluationofthreebiometricdevicesocularparametersandcalculatedintraocularlenspower AT kashtanchaya evaluationofthreebiometricdevicesocularparametersandcalculatedintraocularlenspower AT naffaribrahim evaluationofthreebiometricdevicesocularparametersandcalculatedintraocularlenspower AT shineshira evaluationofthreebiometricdevicesocularparametersandcalculatedintraocularlenspower AT chowersitay evaluationofthreebiometricdevicesocularparametersandcalculatedintraocularlenspower AT benelihadas evaluationofthreebiometricdevicesocularparametersandcalculatedintraocularlenspower |