Comparison of three optical biometers: IOLMaster 500, Lenstar LS 900 and Aladdin

Comparison of measurements and calculated lens power using three biometers: a Scheimpflug tomographer with partial coherence interferometry and two swept source optical coherence tomographers

PURPOSE

To compare the biometric measurements obtained from the Pentacam AXL Wave, IOLMaster 700, and ANTERION and calculate the recommended intraocular lens power using the Barrett Formulae.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of patients who underwent biometry using the Pentacam AXL Wave, IOLMaster 700, and ANTERION. Flat keratometry (K1), steep keratometry (K2), anterior chamber depth (ACD), and axial length (AL) from each device were measured and compared. These parameters were used to calculate the recommended IOL powers using the Barrett formula.

RESULTS

The study included 252 eyes of 153 patients. The IOLMaster had the highest acquisition rate among the two biometers. The Pentacam obtained the shortest mean AL, the IOLMaster measured the highest mean keratometry values, and the ANTERION measured the highest mean ACD. In terms of pairwise comparisons, keratometry and axial length were not significantly different between the Pentacam-IOLMaster and ANTERION-IOLMaster groups, while the rest of the pairwise comparisons were statistically significant. In nontoric and toric eyes, 35-45% of patients recommended the same sphere of IOL power. In another 30-40%, the Pentacam and ANTERION recommended an IOL power one step greater than that of the IOLMaster-derived data. 50% of the study population recommended the same toric-cylinder IOL power.

CONCLUSIONS

The Pentacam AXL Wave, IOLMaster 700, and ANTERION can reliably provide data for IOL power calculations; however, these data are not interchangeable. In nontoric and toric eyes, 35-45% of cases recommended the same sphere IOL power, and in another 30-40%, the Pentacam and ANTERION recommended one-step higher IOL power than the IOLMaster-derived data. In targeting emmetropia, selecting the first plus IOL power is advisable when using the Pentacam and ANTERION to approximate the IOL power calculations recommended by the IOLMaster 700.

Precision and agreement of axial length in paediatric population measured with MYAH and AL-Scan biometers

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Measuring axial length is key in the field of myopia development and control. Hence, the precision and agreement of commercially available biometers is of vital interest to understand their variability and interchangeability in the paediatric population.

BACKGROUND

Different biometers are available to measure axial length and monitor myopia progression in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to assess the precision (repeatability and reproducibility) and agreement of the MYAH and AL-Scan biometers in a paediatric population.

METHODS

Three consecutive measurements were performed using MYAH and AL-Scan biometers in each subject by the same operator to test for repeatability. To test for reproducibility, two measurements were performed for each subject by two different observers with a 5-min interval between measurements. To test the agreement, each subject was measured once with each instrument.

RESULTS

A total of 187 subjects, with a mean age of 8.5 ± 0.3 years and mean spherical equivalent refractive error of +0.22 ± 0.77 D participated in the study. For the repeatability study, the within-subject standard deviation was 0.01 mm, and the repeatability limit was 0.04 mm for both instruments, with no statistically significant differences among repeated measures (p = 0.162 for MYAH and p = 0.774 for AL-Scan). For the reproducibility study, the within-subject standard deviation was 0.01 mm and the repeatability limit was 0.04 mm. There were statistically significant differences for the repeated measures for the AL-Scan (p = 0.002) but not for the MYAH (p = 0.643). Regarding the agreement between both instruments, the 95% limit of agreement ranged from -0.04 to 0.05 mm, and the differences were statistically significant (p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

The repeatability, reproducibility, and agreement of the MYAH and AL-Scan biometers seem optimal for following children with myopia.

Axial Elongation Trajectories in Chinese Children and Adults With High Myopia

Importance

Understanding the long-term axial elongation trajectory in high myopia is important to prevent blindness.

Objective

To evaluate axial elongation trajectories and related visual outcomes in children and adults with high myopia.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cohort study, participants in the Zhongshan Ophthalmic Centre-Brien Holden Vision Institute high myopia cohort were followed up every other year for 8 years. Participants with axial length measurements at baseline (2011 or 2012) and at least 1 follow-up visit were included. Participants were grouped according to baseline age as children and adolescents (7 to <18 years), young adults (18 to <40 years), and older adults (≥40 to 70 years). Data were analyzed from November 1, 2022, to June 1, 2023.

Exposure

High myopia (spherical power ≤-6.00 diopters).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Longitudinal axial elongation trajectories were identified by cluster analysis. Axial elongation rates were calculated by linear mixed-effects models. A 2-sided P < .05 was defined as statistically significant.

Results

A total of 793 participants (median [range] age, 17.8 [6.8-69.7] years; 418 females [52.7%]) and 1586 eyes were included in the analyses. Mean axial elongation rates were 0.46 mm/y (95% CI, 0.44-0.48 mm/y) for children and adolescents, 0.07 mm/y (95% CI, 0.06-0.09 mm/y) for young adults, and 0.13 mm/y (95% CI, 0.07-0.19 mm/y) for older adults. Cluster analysis identified 3 axial elongation trajectories, with the stable, moderate, and rapid progression trajectories having mean axial elongation rates of 0.02 mm/y (95% CI, 0.01-0.02 mm/y), 0.12 mm/y (95% CI, 0.11-0.13 mm/y), and 0.38 mm/y (95% CI, 0.35-0.42 mm/y), respectively. At 8 years of follow-up, compared with the stable progression trajectory, the rapid progression trajectory was associated with a 6.92 times higher risk of developing pathological myopic macular degeneration (defined as diffuse or patchy chorioretinal atrophy or macular atrophy; odds ratio, 6.92 [95% CI, 1.07-44.60]; P = .04), and it was associated with a 0.032 logMAR decrease in best-corrected visual acuity (β = 0.032 [95% CI, 0.001-0.063]; P = .04).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this 8-year follow-up study suggest that axial length in high myopia continues to increase from childhood to late adulthood following 3 distinct trajectories. At 8 years of follow-up, the rapid progression trajectory was associated with a higher risk of developing pathological myopic macular degeneration and poorer best-corrected visual acuity compared with the stable progression trajectory. These distinct axial elongation trajectories could prove valuable for early identification and intervention for high-risk individuals.

Optical Biometry and IOL Calculation in a Commercially Available Optical Coherence Tomography Device and Comparison With Pentacam AXL

PURPOSE

Optical devices are the gold standard for ocular biometry; however, they are unable to obtain high-quality optical coherence tomography (OCT) images. The current study aimed to evaluate ocular measurements and intraocular lens (IOL) calculation used in an anterior/posterior segment OCT device and to compare the results with those of a validated biometer.

DESIGN

Prospective evaluation of a diagnostic tool.

METHODS

This study enrolled healthy subjects at the Hygeia Clinic, Gdańsk, Poland, between October 2021 and November 2021. All individuals had ocular biometry measured with a validated biometer (Pentacam AXL) and with a new module of an anterior/posterior segment OCT device (Revo 80, Optopol Technologies). All IOL calculations were performed for the right eye with keratometric values from the Pentacam for one IOL: the Alcon AcrySof IQ SN60WF, with plano target setting.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 144 participants was 25.23 ± 7.15 years. The axial length measured with Revo was longer than with Pentacam AXL (24.08 ± 1.13 vs 23.98 ± 1.13; P < .0001), a 0.10 ± 0.04 mm difference. This translated into a significantly lower IOL power to achieve emmetropia for all formulas (-0.34 ± 0.15, -0.32 ± 0.13, -0.34 ± 0.19, and -0.30 ± 0.15 for the Hoffer Q, Holladay I, Haigis, and SRK/T formulas, respectively). The study showed high agreement between the devices: nearly 90% of eyes were within ±0.50 diopters for all of the analyzed formulas (r > 0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrates that the results of IOL calculation with the OCT biometer have a very strong correlation with those obtained with the Pentacam AXL; however, axial length measurements and calculated IOL power cannot be considered interchangeable.

Outcomes of four-point suture fixated and two-point sutureless posterior chamber IOLs combined with pars plana vitrectomy

Background

While each scleral fixation method has its own advantages, there is a lack of strong evidence to suggest a superior technique. Advances in cataract surgery expand patient eligibility for successful cataract extraction, benefitting a growing population of pseudophakic patients. However, implantation of secondary intraocular lens (IOL) with compromised anterior or posterior capsule is a more challenging task. Each method of scleral fixation has its own advantages and none of them has strong evidence to be superior. This paper describes postsurgical outcomes of two scleral intraocular(IOL) fixation techniques combined with pars plana vitrectomy(PPV) from a single tertiary referral eye center.

Methods

Patients underwent PPV and IOL implantation with either four-point sutured scleral fixation (Akreos AO60(AK); n = 24) or two-point sutureless flanged intrascleral fixation (CT Lucia(CTL); n = 7). Reports include IOL and sclerotomy placement, fixation techniques, and IOL model.

Results

Thirty-one eyes of thirty patients were analyzed. Average change in vision from baseline measurement was LogMAR − 0.68 ± 0.66 and − 0.90 ± 0.63 for AK and CTL groups, respectively. Average postoperative refractive error was − 0.3 ± 1.03 D (AK) and 0.4 ± 0.60 D (CTL). No opacification cases of Akreos lens were found in this study with the longest follow up of 53 months.

Conclusions

Both methods of implantation (sutured and sutureless) could provide good visual and refractive outcomes. Minimal complication rates were reported despite including patients with multiple comorbidities, making both techniques an attractive choice for secondary IOL implantation.

Toric intraocular lenses: Expanding indications and preoperative and surgical considerations to improve outcomes

Since the introduction of the first toric intraocular lens (IOLs) in the early 1990s, these lenses have become the preferred choice for surgeons across the globe to correct corneal astigmatism during cataract surgery. These lenses allow patients to enjoy distortion-free distance vision with excellent outcomes. They also have their own set of challenges. Inappropriate keratometry measurement, underestimating the posterior corneal astigmatism, intraoperative IOL misalignment, postoperative rotation of these lenses, and IOL decentration after YAG-laser capsulotomy may result in residual cylindrical errors and poor uncorrected visual acuity resulting in patient dissatisfaction. This review provides a broad overview of a few important considerations, which include appropriate patient selection, precise biometry, understanding the design and science behind these lenses, knowledge of intraoperative surgical technique with emphasis on how to achieve proper alignment manually and with image-recognition devices, and successful management of postoperative complications.

Comparison of an upgraded optical biometer with 2 validated optical biometers

PURPOSE

The Revo NX is a new optical biometer, based on spectral-domain optical coherence tomography and able to obtain high-definition scans of both the anterior and posterior segment of the eye. A previous study found that its measurements of axial length (AL) were not interchangeable with those provided by a validated optical biometer; so, the manufacturer updated the instrument to improve agreement of AL values. This study aimed to prospectively compare the measurements by the updated Revo NX (version 9.5.0, biometry module) with those by 2 validated devices, the IOLMaster 700 and Lenstar LS-900.

SETTING

Optopol Technologies, Zawiercie, Poland.

DESIGN

Prospective evaluation of diagnostic test.

METHODS

Comparison between the devices was performed using repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Bonferroni posttest, correlation coefficients, and the Bland-Altman method.

RESULTS

The investigation evaluated the results of 63 patients. For AL, anterior chamber depth (ACD), and lens thickness (LT), the differences were not clinically significant because they were less than 0.01 mm. Repeated measures ANOVA, however, detected a statistically significant difference for AL (P < .0001) and central corneal thickness (P < .0001) but not for ACD (P = .0630) or LT (P = .2667). The results obtained with all 3 biometers manifested a high level of agreement in the Bland-Altman analysis and very strong correlation.

CONCLUSIONS

The measurements by the updated Revo NX had high agreement with the other optical biometers; a clear improvement was detected than the previous analysis between the original Revo NX (version 8.0.3) and the Lenstar LS-900.

Lens thickness and associated ocular biometric factors among cataract patients in Shanghai

Background

To evaluate the distribution of lens thickness (LT) and its associations with other ocular biometric factors among cataract patients in Shanghai.

Methods

Twenty-four thousand thirteen eyes from 24,013 cataract patients were retrospectively included. Ocular biometric factors including LT, central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), white-to-white (WTW) distance, anterior corneal curvature, and axial length (AL) were obtained using the IOLMaster700. The associations between LT and general or ocular factors were assessed.

Results

The mean age was 62.5 ± 13.6 years and 56.1% were female. The mean LT was 4.51 ± 0.46 mm. The LT was greater in older patients (P < 0.001). LT was positively correlated with CCT, while negatively correlated with ACD, WTW, and anterior corneal curvature (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that increased LT was associated with older age, male gender, thicker CCT, shallower ACD, larger WTW, and flatter anterior corneal curvature (P < 0.001). LT changed with a variable behavior according to AL. In short eyes LT increased as AL increased, then decreased with longer AL in normal eyes and moderate myopic eyes, but increased again as AL increased in highly myopic eyes. Thickest LT was found in the 20.01–22 mm AL group. The correlation between LT and other biometric factors remained significant when stratified by ALs.

Conclusions

In a large Chinese cataractous population, we found that the thicker lens may be associated with older age, male gender, thicker CCT, shallower ACD, larger WTW, and flatter anterior corneal curvature. As AL increased, the change of LT was nonlinear, with the thickest lens seen in the 20–22 mm AL group.

Estimation of ocular axial length with optometric parameters is not accurate

Myopia is a worldwide major public concern, aside from the visual disturbance needing optical correction, myopia may be associated with open angle glaucoma, retinal detachment and myopic maculopathy. The higher the myopia the higher the risk for retinal associated comorbidities, and the axial length is the more important measure to estimate risk of visual impairment. Recently a formula to predict axial length using spherical equivalent and keratometry was proposed, with the intention of categorizing the risk of visual impairment with Tideman et al. classification.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the accuracy of an axial length prediction formula in a Colombian population 8-17 years old.

METHODS

Children from MIOPUR study with optical biometer axial length measure (AL), manifest refraction and keratometry were included in the analysis. Predicted axial length (PAL) was calculated with the prediction formula. A Bland-Altman assessment was conducted, and the concordance correlation coefficient was measured. Proposed classification of AL to establish risk of visual loss was used with measured AL and with PAL. The percentage of eyes misclassified was then established.

RESULTS

A total of 2129 eyes were included in the analysis. Mean difference of axial length (actual AL minus PAL) was -0.516 mm (-1.559 mm - 0.528 mm). Concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) of 0.656 (IC95 0.636-0.675) was found between the real AL and PAL. PAL differed from measured AL by 1 mm or more in 16.58 %, and by 2 mm or more, in 0.61 % of the eyes. In myopic eyes, PAL was in average 0.426 mm longer than the AL actually measured with CCC of 0.714 (IC95 0.666-0.761). PAL differed from measured AL by 1 mm or more in 21.92 %, and by 2 mm or more, in 0.45 % of the myopic eyes. The study revealed that 15.03 % of all eyes, and 29.81 % of myopic eyes, were misclassified when PAL was used.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed axial length prediction formula was not accurate, and it did not adequately classify risk of visual impairment in myopic eyes in a group of Colombian children. We consider that it is not possible to predict the axial length based only on optometric data, such as the corneal radius of curvature and the spherical equivalent. This is very possibly related to the variability of crystalline lens power within a population.

Recent developments in intraocular lens power calculation methods-update 2020

For many decades only a few formulas have been available to calculate the intraocular lens (IOL) power for patients undergoing cataract surgery: the Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1 and 2 and SRK/T. In recent years, several new formulas for IOL power calculation have been introduced with the aim of improving the accuracy of refraction prediction in eyes undergoing cataract surgery. These include the Barrett Universal II, the Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO), the Kane, the Næser 2, the Olsen, the Panacea, the Pearl DGS, the Radial Basis Function (RBF), the T2 and the VRF formulas. Although most of them are unpublished so that their structure is unknown, we give an overview of each formula and report the results of the studies that have compared them. Their performance in short and long eyes is provided and a special focus is given on the issue of segmented axial length, which is a promising method to obtain more accurate outcomes in short and long eyes. Here, the group refractive index originally developed for the IOLMaster may not represent the best method to convert the optical path length into a physical distance. The issue of posterior and total corneal astigmatism (TCA) is discussed in relation to toric IOLs; the latest formulas for toric IOLs and their results are also reported.

Standardizing sum-of-segments axial length using refractive index models

Optical biometry uses interferometry to measure the axial length (AL) of the eye. Traditionally, one-variable regression formulas have converted the optical path length measured by a biometer to a geometric AL. An alternate calculation of axial length sums the individual segments of the eye (sum-of-segments AL). This calculation has been shown to improve predictions of some intraocular lens power formulas when used in place of traditional axial length. Sum-of-segments ALs are determined from 13 refractive index models. As measured in 1695 eyes, these yield different ocular axial lengths. A path to standardization from these models is presented.

Intraocular Lens Power Formulas, Biometry, and Intraoperative Aberrometry: A Review

The refractive outcome of cataract surgery is influenced by the choice of intraocular lens (IOL) power formula and the accuracy of the various devices used to measure the eye (including intraoperative aberrometry [IA]). This review aimed to cover the breadth of literature over the previous 10 years, focusing on 3 main questions: (1) What IOL power formulas currently are available and which is the most accurate? (2) What biometry devices are available, do the measurements they obtain differ from one another, and will this cause a clinically significant change in IOL power selection? and (3) Does IA improve refractive outcomes? A literature review was performed by searching the PubMed database for articles on each of these topics that identified 1313 articles, of which 166 were included in the review. For IOL power formulas, the Kane formula was the most accurate formula over the entire axial length (AL) spectrum and in both the short eye (AL, ≤22.0 mm) and long eye (AL, ≥26.0 mm) subgroups. Other formulas that performed well in the short-eye subgroup were the Olsen (4-factor), Haigis, and Hill-radial basis function (RBF) 1.0. In the long-eye group, the other formulas that performed well included the Barrett Universal II (BUII), Olsen (4-factor), or Holladay 1 with Wang-Koch adjustment. All biometry devices delivered highly reproducible measurements, and most comparative studies showed little difference in the average measures for all the biometric variables between devices. The differences seen resulted in minimal clinically significant effects on IOL power selection. The main difference found between devices was the ability to measure successfully through dense cataracts, with swept-source OCT-based machines performing better than partial coherence interferometry and optical low-coherence reflectometry devices. Intraoperative aberrometry generally improved outcomes for spherical and toric IOLs in eyes both with and without prior refractive surgery when the BUII and Hill-RBF, Barrett toric calculator, or Barrett True-K formulas were not used. When they were used, IA did not result in better outcomes.