Literature DB >> 23314479

Agreement of IOL power and axial length obtained by IOLMaster 500 vs IOLMaster 500 with Sonolink connection.

Sabong Srivannaboon1, Chareenun Chirapapaisan, Patchara Nantasri, Mathinee Chongchareon, Pratuangsri Chonpimai.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The accurrate and expedient ocular biometry is essential for modern cataract surgery. IOLMaster 500, one of the most popular partial coherence interferometry (PCI) device, has been widely used. However, with the PCI device, it is difficult to obtain the axial length through densely opaque media. With the current version of IOLMaster 500, a unique feature is added to link with the Synergy immersion A-scan ultrasound (sonolink connection). In case of failure to measure axial length by IOLMaster 500, the axial length can be obtained by ultrasound, and then transferred to IOLMaster 500 for the IOL power calculation. This study aims to compare the results and evaluate the agreement between IOL power and axial length obtained by IOLMaster 500 and IOLMaster 500 with sonolink connection.
METHODS: A prospective study of 60 eyes in 60 mild-to-moderate cataract patients was conducted under Institutional Ethics Committee approval. Keratometry (K) and axial length (AL) of all eyes were measured using IOLMaster 500 (Carl Zeiss, Germany), then IOL power was generated using Holladay 1 formula (group 1). After 5 min, the K measurements were repeated with IOLMaster 500 and the AL were measured again using the Synergy A-scan ultrasound (Accutome, USA). Then, the AL data were transferred to IOLMaster 500 via the sonolink connection to generate the IOL power using the same setting (group 2). The IOL power and AL were compared between the two groups, and the agreement was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the Bland-Altman method.
RESULTS: The mean IOL power in group 1 was 21.04 + 2.36 D and group 2 was 21.03 + 2.36 D. The mean AL in group 1 was 23.35 + 0.86 mm and in group 2 was 23.36 + 0.86 mm. There was no statistically significant difference in IOL power and AL between the two groups. The agreements in IOL power and AL between both groups were high (ICCs = 0.997 for IOL power and 0.993 for AL)
CONCLUSIONS: The IOL power and AL derived from both groups were similar. The agreements between them were high.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23314479     DOI: 10.1007/s00417-012-2222-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0721-832X            Impact factor:   3.117


  25 in total

1.  Evaluation of the practicality of optical biometry and applanation ultrasound in 253 eyes.

Authors:  Mana Tehrani; Frank Krummenauer; Eric Blom; H Burkhard Dick
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.351

2.  Precision of biometry, keratometry, and refractive measurements with a partial coherence interferometry-keratometry device.

Authors:  H John Shammas; Steven Chan
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.351

3.  Improved accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation with the Zeiss IOLMaster.

Authors:  Thomas Olsen
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol Scand       Date:  2007-02

4.  B-mode-guided vector-A-mode versus A-mode biometry to determine axial length and intraocular lens power.

Authors:  O Bergès; M Puech; M Assouline; L Letenneur; M Gastellu-Etchegorry
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 3.351

5.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Comparison of refractive outcomes using immersion ultrasound biometry and IOLMaster biometry.

Authors:  John Landers; Michael Goggin
Journal:  Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 4.207

7.  Optical and ultrasound measurement of axial length and anterior chamber depth for intraocular lens power calculation.

Authors:  János Németh; Orsolya Fekete; Norbert Pesztenlehrer
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.351

8.  Partial coherence laser interferometry vs conventional ultrasound biometry in intraocular lens power calculations.

Authors:  M S Rajan; I Keilhorn; J A Bell
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.775

9.  Comparing immersion ultrasound with partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens power calculation.

Authors:  Julio Narváez; D Hunter Cherwek; R Doyle Stulting; Rhonda Waldron; Grenith J Zimmerman; Izak F Wessels; George O Waring
Journal:  Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging       Date:  2008 Jan-Feb

10.  Comparison of immersion ultrasound biometry and partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens calculation according to Haigis.

Authors:  W Haigis; B Lege; N Miller; B Schneider
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 3.117

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.