J Korean Ophthalmol Soc.  2012 Jun;53(6):833-838.

Comparison of Ocular Biometry and Postoperative Refraction in Cataract Patients Between Lenstar(R) and IOL Master(R)

• Shin JW
• Seong M
• Kang MH
• Cho HY
• Lee YJ

Abstract

PURPOSE
To compare axial length, anterior chamber depth, and keratometric measurements of an optical low-coherence reflectometry device with those of other ocular biometry devices and evaluate the accuracy of predicting postoperative refraction.
METHODS
A total of 32 eyes in 32 patients who received cataract surgery were included in the present study. The axial length, anterior chamber depth, and keratometry were measured by optical low-coherence reflectometry (Lenstar LS900(R)), partial coherence interferometry (IOL master(R)), and ultrasound. The SRK/T formula was used to calculate IOL power, and predictive error that subtracts predictive refraction from postoperative refraction was compared among ocular biometry devices.
RESULTS
Axial length, anterior chamber depth, and keratometry had a strong correlation and demonstrated no statistically significant differences between Lenstar LS900(R) and other devices. The Bland-Altman plots showed a high degree of agreement between Lenstar LS900(R) and other devices. The mean absolute prediction errors in Lenstar LS900(R) and IOL master(R) were not significantly different.
CONCLUSIONS
The ocular biometric measurements and prediction of postoperative refraction using Lenstar LS900(R) were as accurate as IOL master(R) and ultrasound.

Keyword

Lenstar LS900; Ocular biometry; Optical low coherence reflectometry

MeSH Terms

Anterior Chamber
Biometry
Cataract
Eye
Humans
Interferometry

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Bland-Altman plot of axial length between Lenstar LS900® and IOL master® (A), and A-scan (B) (95% limits of agreement for axial length difference: Lenstar LS900® - IOL master® [-0.42, 0.39]; Lenstar LS900® - A-scan [-0.38, 0.43]).

• 

  Figure 2 Bland-Altman plot of anterior chamber depth between Lenstar LS900® and IOL master® (95% limits of agreement for axial length difference: Lenstar LS900® - IOL master® [-0.32, 0.23]).

• 

  Figure 3 Bland-Altman plot of keratometry between Lenstar LS900® and IOL master® (95% limits of agreement for axial length difference: Lenstar LS900® - IOL master® [-0.30, 0.42]).

Reference

1. Findl O, Drexler W, Menapace R, et al. Improved prediction of intraocular lens power using partial coherence interferometry. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001. 27:861–867.

2. Drexler W, Findle O, Menapace R, et al. Partial coherence interferometry: a novel approach to biometry in cataract surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998. 126:524–534.

3. Drexler W, Hitzenberger CK, Baumgartner A, et al. Investigation of dispersion effects in ocular media by multiple wavelength partial coherence interferometry. Exp Eye Res. 1998. 66:25–33.

4. Lam AK, Chan R, Pang PC. The repeatability and accuracy of axial length and anterior chamber depth measurements from the IOL Master. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2001. 21:477–483.

5. Choi JH, Roh GH. The reproducibility and accuracy of biometry parameter measurement from IOL Master. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2004. 45:1665–1673.

6. Buckhurst PJ, Wolffsohn JS, Shah S, et al. A new optical low coherence reflectometry device for ocular biometry in cataract patients. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009. 93:949–953.

7. Chen YA, Hirnschall N, Findl O. Evaluation of 2 new optical biometry devices and comparison with the current gold standard biometer. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011. 37:513–517.

8. Hoffer KJ, Shammas HJ, Savini G. Comparison of 2 laser instruments for measuring axial length. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010. 36:644–648.

9. Holzer MP, Mamusa M, Auffarth GU. Accuracy of a new partial coherence interferometry analyser for biometric measurements. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009. 93:807–810.

10. Jasvinder S, Khang TF, Sarinder KK, et al. Agreement analysis of LENSTAR with other techniques of biometry. Eye (Lond). 2011. 25:717–724.

11. Haigis W, Lege B, Miller N, et al. Comparison of immersion ultrasound biometry and partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens calculation according to Haigis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2000. 238:765–773.

12. Giers U, Epple C. Comparison of A-scan device accuracy. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1990. 16:235–242.

13. Santodomingo-Rubido J, Mallen EA, Gilmartin B, Wolffsohn JS. A new non-contact optical device for ocular biometry. Br J Ophthalmol. 2002. 86:458–462.

14. Rabsilber TM, Jepsen C, Auffarth GU, et al. Intraocular lens power calculation: clinical comparison of 2 optical biometry devices. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010. 36:230–234.

15. Cruysberg LP, Doors M, Verbakel F, et al. Evaluation of the Lenstar LS 900 non-contact biometer. Br J Ophthalmol. 2010. 94:106–110.

16. Rohrer K, Frueh BE, Wälti R, et al. Comparison and evaluation of ocular biometry using a new noncontact optical low-coherence reflectometer. Ophthalmology. 2009. 116:2087–2092.