Literature DB >> 25024102

Refractive outcomes comparison between the Lenstar LS 900® optical biometry and immersion A-scan ultrasound.

Palanyraj Naicker1, Siva Sundralingam, Mohammadreza Peyman, Azida Juana, Nor Fadhilah Mohamad, Maung Maung Win, Angela Loo, Visvaraja Subrayan.   

Abstract

To determine the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) calculations in eyes undergoing phacoemulsification cataract surgery with IOL implantation using immersion A-scan ultrasound (US) and Lenstar LS 900(®) biometry. In this prospective study, 200 eyes of 200 patients were randomized to undergo either Lenstar LS 900(®) or immersion A-scan US biometry to determine the IOL dioptric power prior to phacoemulsification cataract surgery. Post-operative refractive outcomes of these two groups of patients were compared. The result showed no significant difference between the target spherical equivalent (SE) and the post-operative SE value by the Lenstar LS 900(®) (p value = 0.632) or immersion A-scan US biometry (p value = 0.438) devices. The magnitude of difference between the two biometric devices were not significantly different (p value = 0.868). There was no significant difference in the predicted post-operative refractive outcome between immersion A-scan US biometry and Lenstar LS 900(®). Based on the results, the immersion A-scan US technique is as accurate as Lenstar LS 900(®) in the hands of an experienced operator.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25024102     DOI: 10.1007/s10792-014-9970-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0165-5701            Impact factor:   2.031


  17 in total

1.  Contact versus immersion biometry of axial length before cataract surgery.

Authors:  Michael P Hennessy; Derek G Chan
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 3.351

2.  The reproducibility of biometry and keratometry measurements.

Authors:  J M Butcher; C O'Brien
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 3.775

3.  Measurement of axial length in the calculation of intraocular lens power.

Authors:  P S Raj; B Ilango; A Watson
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 3.775

4.  Agreement analysis of LENSTAR with other techniques of biometry.

Authors:  S Jasvinder; T F Khang; K K S Sarinder; V P Loo; V Subrayan
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2011-03-11       Impact factor: 3.775

5.  Comparing optical low coherence reflectometry and immersion ultrasound in refractive outcome after cataract surgery.

Authors:  Sheridan Lam
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 3.351

6.  Immersion versus contact technique in the measurement of axial length by ultrasound.

Authors:  T Olsen; P J Nielsen
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh)       Date:  1989-02

7.  Comparison of intraocular lens power prediction using immersion ultrasound and optical biometry with and without formula optimization.

Authors:  Gabor Nemeth; Attila Nagy; Andras Berta; Laszlo Modis
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-04-13       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  Prediction error after pediatric cataract surgery with intraocular lens implantation: Contact versus immersion A-scan biometry.

Authors:  Rupal H Trivedi; M Edward Wilson
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.351

9.  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

10.  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
View more
  1 in total

1.  Lenstar LS 900 versus Pentacam-AXL: analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction.

Authors:  Henrique Aragão Arruda; Joana M Pereira; Arminda Neves; Maria João Vieira; Joana Martins; João C Sousa
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-01-14       Impact factor: 4.379

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.