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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lender, Rivkah, Mirsky, Devora, Greenberger, Riki, Boim, Zipora, Ben-Yaakov, Lee, Kashtan, Chaya, Naffar, Ibrahim, Shine, Shira, Chowers, Itay, Ben-Eli, Hadas
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