COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF 2 BIOMETERS USING SWEPT-SOURCE OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY TECHNOLOGY

A comparison of white-to-white measurements obtained by Anterion AS-OCT versus three optical devices in refractive surgery candidates

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To assess the agreement between Anterion AS-OCT and three optical devices in measuring the white-to-white (WTW) diameter in candidates for refractive surgery.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional prospective study, 129 right eyes of 129 normal individuals underwent consecutive scans with the Anterion, the Pentacam AXL, the IOLMaster 700, and the Orbscan IIz. Mean difference (MD), 95% limits of agreement (LoA), and concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were calculated to assess agreement and interchangeability.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 30.4 ± 5.9 (range: 21-47) years. The mean WTW distance measured by the different instruments was as follows: 12.00 ± 0.42 mm (range, 10.57 to 13.05) using the Anterion, 11.87 ± 0.34 (11.10 to 12.80) using the Pentacam, 12.12 ± 0.44 (11.00 to 13.30) using the IOLMaster, and 11.73 ± 0.37 (11.00 to 13.10) using the Orbscan. The MD and 95% LoA for Anterion vs. Pentacam, IOLMaster, or Orbscan were [0.11; -0.31 to 0.54 mm], [-0.13; -0.93 to 0.66], and [0.25; -0.28 to 0.78], respectively. The corresponding CCCs were 0.803, 0.514, and 0.631.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found weak agreement between Anterion and Pentacam AXL, IOLMaster 700, and Orbscan IIz devices regarding WTW distance measurements in refractive surgery candidates. Therefore, it is not recommended to use Anterion's WTW measurements interchangeably with the other three devices, particularly for phakic intraocular lens sizing.

Comparison of refractive outcomes obtained with two swept-source OCT-based optical biometers after cataract surgery: A study of 152 eyes

PURPOSE

To compare two swept-source OCT optical biometers, the Anterion® (Heidelberg Engineering GmbH, Heidelberg, Germany) and the IOLMaster 700® (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany), in the analysis of biometric data, intraocular lens (IOL) calculation and postoperative spherical equivalent predictability.

METHODS

This was a real-life, single-center, retrospective study including 152 eyes of 81 consecutive patients referred for cataract surgery. All patients were examined with the IOLMaster 700® and the Anterion®. Biometric data (axial length [AL], anterior chamber depth [ACD], mean keratometry [Km], K1 [flat keratometry], K2 [steep keratometry] and axis, TK1 [flat total keratometry], TK2 [steep total keratometry], central pachymetry, lens thickness [LT], white-to-white distance [WTW]), IOL calculation with the SRK/T formula, and postoperative refractive outcome at 1 month were compared.

RESULTS

All biometric measurements were significantly different between the two biometers. Correlations were excellent for AL, pachymetry, ACD, LT and keratometry measurements, and for the IOL calculation (r>0.96, intraclass correlation coefficient=1). The IOL power for emmetropia was similar between both biometers when the SRK/T formula was used (20.84±3.24D versus 20.86±3.29D, P=0.61). The mean postoperative spherical equivalent prediction error calculated using the SRK/T formula was 0.03±0.5D for the IOLMaster 700® versus 0.01±0.47D for the Anterion® (P=0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed excellent correlation and agreement for the biometric measurements and the IOL power calculation with the SRK/T formula between both biometers.

Impact of uncertainties in biometric parameters on intraocular lens power formula predicted refraction using a Monte-Carlo simulation

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the uncertainty in the formula predicted refractive outcome REFU after cataract surgery resulting from measurement uncertainties in modern optical biometers using literature data for within-subject standard deviation Sw.

METHODS

This Monte-Carlo simulation study used a large dataset containing 16 667 preoperative IOLMaster 700 biometric measurements. Based on literature Sw values, REFU was derived for both the Haigis and Castrop formulae using error propagation strategies. Using the Hoya Vivinex lens (IOL) as an example, REFU was calculated both with (WLT) and without (WoLT) consideration of IOL power labelling tolerances.

RESULTS

WoLT the median REFU was 0.10/0.12 dpt for the Haigis/Castrop formula, and WLT it was 0.13/0.15 dpt. WoLT REFU increased systematically for short eyes (or high power IOLs), and WLT this effect was even more pronounced because of increased labelling tolerances. WoLT the uncertainty in the measurement of the corneal front surface radius showed the largest contribution to REFU, especially in long eyes (and low power IOLs). WLT the IOL power uncertainty dominated in short eyes (or high power IOLs) and the uncertainty of the corneal front surface in long eyes (or low power IOLs).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with published data on the formula prediction error of refractive outcome after cataract surgery, the uncertainty of biometric measures seems to contribute with ⅓ to ½ to the entire standard deviation. REFU systematically increases with IOL power and decreases with axial length.

Evaluation of a new dynamic real-time visualization 25 kHz swept-source optical coherence tomography based biometer

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the intraobserver repeatability and interobserver reproducibility of a newly developed dynamic real-time visualization 25 kHz swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) based biometer (ZW-30, TowardPi Medical Technology Ltd, China) and compare its agreement with another SS-OCT based biometer (IOLMaster 700, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany).

METHODS

Eighty-two healthy right eyes were enrolled in this prospective observational study. Measurements were repeated for three times using the ZW-30 and IOLMaster 700 in a random order. Obtained parameters included axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), aqueous depth (AQD), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), mean keratometry (Km), astigmatism magnitude (AST), vector J0, vector J45, and corneal diameter (CD). The within-subject standard deviation (Sw), test-retest (TRT) variability, coefficient of variation (CoV), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were adopted to assess the intraobserver repeatability and interobserver reproducibility. The double-angle plot was also used to display the distribution of AST. To estimate agreement, Bland-Altman plots were used.

RESULTS

For the intraobserver repeatability and interobserver reproducibility, the Sw, TRT and CoV for all parameters were low. Meanwhile, the ICC values were all close to 1.000, except for the J45 (ICC = 0.887 for the intraobserver repeatability). The double-angle plot showed that the distribution of AST measured by these two devices was similar. For agreement, the Bland-Altman plots showed narrow 95% limits of agreements (LoAs) for AL, CCT, AQD, ACD, LT, Km AST, J0, J45, and CD (- 0.02 mm to 0.02 mm, - 7.49 μm to 8.08 μm, - 0.07 mm to 0.04 mm, - 0.07 mm to 0.04 mm, - 0.07 mm to 0.08 mm, - 0.16 D to 0.30 D, - 0.30 D to 0.29 D, - 0.16 D to 0.16 D, - 0.23 D to 0.13 D, and - 0.39 mm to 0.10 mm, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The newly dynamic real-time visualization biometer exhibited excellent intraobserver repeatability and interobserver reproducibility. The two devices both based on the SS-OCT principle had similar ocular parameters measurement values and can be interchanged in clinical practice.

Interchangeability in Automated Corneal Diameter Measurements Across Different Biometric Devices: A Systematic Review of Agreement Studies

PURPOSE

To provide an up-to-date review of the agreement in automated white-to-white (WTW) measurement between the latest topographic and biometric devices.

METHODS

In this systematic review, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched for articles published between 2017 and 2023, focusing on WTW agreement studies on adult, virgin eyes, with or without cataract and no other ocular comorbidities. Studies evaluating WTW measurements performed with autokeratometers, manual calipers, or manual image analysis were excluded. When available, the following metrics for the agreement of WTW measurements between pairs of devices were included: mean difference ± standard deviation, 95% limits of agreement (LoA), LoA width, 95% confidence interval (95 CI%), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS

Forty-one studies, covering comparisons for 19 devices, were included. Altogether, 81 paired comparisons were performed for 4,595 eyes of 4,002 individuals. The mean difference in WTW measurements between devices ranged from 0.01 mm up to 0.96 mm, with varying CI. The 95% LoA width ranged from 0.31 to 2.45 mm (median: 0.65 mm). The majority of pairwise comparisons reported LoA wider than 0.5 mm, a clinically significant value for phakic intraocular lens sizing.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly all analyzed studies demonstrated the lack of interchangeability of the WTW parameter. The corneal diameter, assessed by means of grayscale en-face image analysis, tended to demonstrate the lowest agreement among devices compared to other measured biometric parameters. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(3):e182-e194.].

Repeatability of biometric measures from the IOLMaster 700 in a cataractous population

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the repeatability of biometric measures and also to assess the interactions between the uncertainties in these measures for use in an error propagation model, using data from a large patient cohort.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional non-randomised study we evaluated a dataset containing 3379 IOLMaster 700 biometric measurements taken prior to cataract surgery. Only complete scans with at least 3 successful measurements for each eye performed on the same day were considered. The mean (Mean) and standard deviations (SD) for each sequence of measurements were derived and analysed. Correlations between the uncertainties were assessed using Spearman rank correlations.

RESULTS

In the dataset with 677 eyes matching the inclusion criteria, the within subject standard deviation and repeatability for all parameters match previously published data. The SD of the axial length (AL) increased with the Mean AL, but there was no noticeable dependency of the SD of any of the other parameters on their corresponding Mean value. The SDs of the parameters are not independent of one another, and in particular we observe correlations between those for AL, anterior chamber depth, aqueous depth, lens thickness and corneal thickness.

CONCLUSIONS

The SD change over Mean for AL measurement and the correlations between the uncertainties of several biometric parameters mean that a simple Gaussian error propagation model cannot be used to derive the effect of biometric uncertainties on the predicted intraocular lens power and refraction after cataract surgery.

Technical failure rates for biometry between swept-source and older-generation optical coherence methods: a review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Precise ocular measurements are fundamental for achieving excellent target refraction following both cataract surgery and refractive lens exchange. Biometry devices with swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) employ longer wavelengths (1055-1300 nm) in order to have better penetration through opaque lenses than those with partial coherence interferometry (PCI) or low-coherence optical reflectometry (LCOR) methods. However, to date a pooled analysis showing the technical failure rate (TFR) between the methods has not been published. The aim of this study was to compare the TFR in SS-OCT and in PCI/LCOR biometry.

METHODS

PubMed and Scopus were used to search the medical literature as of Feb 1, 2022. The following keywords were used in various combinations: optical biometry, partial coherence interferometry, low-coherence optical reflectometry, swept-source optical coherence tomography. Only clinical studies referring to patients undergoing routine cataract surgery, and employing at least two (PCI or LCOR vs. SS-OCT) optical methods for optical biometry in the same cohort of patients were included.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included in the final analysis, which presented results of 2,459 eyes of at least 1,853 patients. The overall TFR of all included studies was 5.47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.66-8.08%; overall I² = 91.49%). The TFR was significantly different among the three methods (p < 0.001): 15.72% for PCI (95% CI: 10.73-22.46%; I² = 99.62%), 6.88% for LCOR (95% CI: 3.26-13.92%; I² = 86.44%), and 1.51% for SS-OCT (95% CI: 0.94-2.41%; I² = 24.64%). The pooled TFR for infrared methods (PCI and LCOR) was 11.12% (95% CI: 8.45-14.52%; I² = 78.28%), and was also significantly different to that of SS-OCT: 1.51% (95% CI: 0.94-2.41%; I² = 24.64%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A meta-analysis of the TFR of different biometry methods highlighted that SS-OCT biometry resulted in significantly decreased TFR compared to PCI/LCOR devices.

Clinical applications of anterior segment swept-source optical coherence tomography: A systematic review

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a non-invasive method that provides the opportunity to examine tissues by taking cross-sectional images. OCT is increasingly being used to evaluate anterior segment (AS) pathologies. Swept-source (SS) OCT allows greater penetration and achieves better visualization of the internal configuration of AS tissues due to the longer wavelength employed and high scan speeds. We reviewed the utilization of AS SS-OCT in various conditions including glaucoma, ocular surface pathologies, iris tumors, refractive surgery, cataract surgery, and scleral diseases. A systematic literature search was carried out on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases between January 1, 2008, and September 1, 2022 using the following keywords: AS SS-OCT; dry eye and SS-OCT; ocular surface and SS-OCT; cornea and SS-OCT; dystrophy and SS-OCT; glaucoma and SS-OCT; ocular surface tumors and SS-OCT; conjunctival tumors and SS-OCT; refractive surgery and SS-OCT; cataract and SS-OCT; biometry and SS-OCT; sclera and SS-OCT; iris and SS-OCT; ciliary body and SS-OCT; artificial intelligence and SS-OCT. A total of 221 studies were included in this review. Review of the existing literature shows that SS-OCT offers several advantages in the diagnosis of AS diseases. Exclusive features of SS-OCT including rapid scanning, deeper tissue penetration, and better image quality help improve our understanding of various AS pathologies.

Comparison of Refractive Prediction Accuracy With Three Optical Devices

PURPOSE

To investigate refractive prediction accuracy with the OA-2000 (Tomey), Anterion (Heidelberg Engineering), and IOLMaster 500 (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) in patients with cataract.

METHODS

Patients with cataract referred for phacoemulsification were enrolled and scanned with the OA-2000, Anterion, and IOLMaster 500 in random order. The success rate of axial length (AL) measurements per device was calculated and a chi-square test was used to identify the differences in acquisition rate between the three devices. The Bland-Altman method was used to appraise the agreement of biometric parameters between the three devices. Four different formulas (Barrett Universal II [BUII], Haigis, Holladay 1, and SRK/T) were included in the study. The parameters of refractive prediction accuracy comprised predictive error (PE), absolute PE (AE), and percentages of eyes with a PE within ±0.50, ±0.75, and ±1.00 diopters (D).

RESULTS

The acquisition rates of AL measurements with the OA-2000 and Anterion were 97.35% and 94.70%, respectively (chi-square = 3.82, P > .05). A significantly lower acquisition rate of 84.82% was obtained with the IOLMaster 500 compared with the other two devices (P < .05). Bland-Altman analysis identified good agreement between the three biometers with narrow 95% limits of agreement for flat and steep keratometry (K1 and K2), anterior chamber depth (ACD), and AL. For PE, only the differences between the Anterion and IOLMaster 500 with the Barrett UII and Haigis formulas were statistically significant (P < .05). The three devices revealed no statistically significant differences in MAE, MedAE, and the proportion of eyes with a PE within ±0.50, ±0.75, and ±1.00 D (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The OA-2000 and Anterion showed a similarly higher acquisition rate of AL measurements than the IOLMaster 500 in patients with cataract. Good agreement for K1, K2, ACD, and AL was found between the three biometers. Regarding refractive prediction accuracy, the Anterion did not significantly outperform both the OA-2000 and IOLMaster 500. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(1):48-55.].

Advantageous effect of pupil dilation on the quality of optical biometry axial length measurement in individuals with dense cataract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of pharmacologic pupil dilation on the quality of axial length (AL) measurement in patients with dense cataracts and previous low-quality AL measurements performed without dilation.

SETTING

Shaare-Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

All participants underwent swept-source optical coherence tomographic (SS-OCT) biometry. Those with low-quality AL measurements due to dense cataract underwent an additional SS-OCT biometric evaluation after pupil dilation, and the AL measurement of the same eye was recorded.

RESULTS

2076 patients underwent SS-OCT during the study period, and 177 (8.52%) had low-quality AL measurements because of dense cataract. 79 (44.63%, mean age 72.53 ± 13.27 years, 43 females) of those 177 patients underwent repeat SS-OCT biometric imaging after pharmacologic pupil dilation, and formed the study group. After pupil dilation, high-quality AL measurements were successfully obtained in 60 (75.95%) of the 79 eyes. The mean SD of the AL measurements decreased significantly ( P &amp;lt; .001), and the number of successful OCT scans per measurement increased significantly ( P &amp;lt; .001) after pupil dilation. The mean difference of the AL before and after pupil dilation was 0.03 ± 0.07 mm ( P &amp;lt; .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacologic pupil dilation improved the quality of SS-OCT biometrically measured AL in patients with low-quality AL measurement due to dense cataract. These results could potentially improve postoperative refractive outcomes after cataract surgery and reduce the need of additional AL measurements by more complicated alternative means in this group.

Comparison of 2 modern swept-source optical biometers—IOLMaster 700 and Anterion

Purpose

To compare biometric measures from 2 modern swept-source OCT biometers (IOLMaster700 (Z, Carl-Zeiss-Meditec) and Anterion (H, Heidelberg Engineering)) and evaluate the effect of measurement differences on the resulting lens power (IOLP).

Methods

Biometric measurements were made on a large study population with both instruments. We compared axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT) and corneal front and back surface curvature measurements. Corneal curvature was converted to power vectors and total power derived using the Gullstrand formula. A paraxial lens power calculation formula and a prediction for the IOL axial position according to the Castrop formula were used to estimate differences in IOLP targeting for emmetropia.

Results

There were no systematic differences between measurements of AL (− 0.0146 ± 0.0286 mm) and LT (0.0383 ± 0.0595 mm), whereas CCT yielded lower (7.8 ± 6.6 µm) and ACD higher (0.1200 ± 0.0531 mm) values with H. With H, CCT was lower for thicker corneas. The mean corneal front surface radius did not differ (− 0.4 ± 41.6 µm), but the corneal back surface yielded a steeper radius (− 397.0 ± 74.6 µm) with H, giving lower mean total power (− 0.3469 ± 0.2689 dpt). The astigmatic vector components in 0°/90° and 45°/135° were the same between both instruments for the front/back surface or total power.

Conclusion

The biometric measures used in standard formulae (AL, corneal front surface curvature/power) are consistent between instruments. However, modern formulae involving ACD, CCT or corneal back surface curvature may yield differences in IOLP, and therefore, formula constant optimisation customised to the biometer type is required.

Comparison of acquisition rate and agreement of axial length with two swept-source optical coherence tomographers and a partial coherence interferometer

PURPOSE

To assess the acquisition rate and agreement of axial length (AL) measurements with the OA-2000, Anterion, and IOLMaster 500 in cataractous patients.

METHODS

In total, 298 eyes of 191 cataractous patients were enrolled and scanned with the three devices in random order. The success rate of AL measurements per device was calculated and a chi-square test was utilized to identify the differences in acquisition rate between the three devices. Logistic regression analysis was applied to evaluate the association of different cataract types and severity with the AL measurement acquisition rate. Bland-Altman plots were mapped to appraise the agreement of AL values.

RESULTS

AL measurements were successfully achieved in 288 eyes (96.64%) with the OA-2000, in 282 eyes (94.30%) with the Anteiron, and in 246 eyes (82.55%) with the IOLMaster 500. Significant differences in the acquisition rate were found between either of the SS-OCT devices and IOLMaster 500 by chi-square analysis (P < 0.001). No significant difference was noted between OA-2000 and Anterion. Increasing severity of posterior subcapsular cataract was associated with a higher failure rate with the IOLMaster 500. Bland-Altman analysis identified good agreement between the three biometers with narrow 95% limits of agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

The OA-2000 and Anterion showed similarly higher acquisition rate of AL measurements than IOLMaster 500 in cataractous patients. Good agreement for AL values was found between the three biometers in cataractous patients.

Comparison Study of the Two Biometers Based on Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Technology

This research aimed to investigate the potential differences in the parameters, including axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), flat keratometry (Kf), steep keratometry (Ks), mean keratometry (Km), astigmatism, white-to-white (WTW) distance, acquired rate, and intraocular lens (IOL) power, between the two swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) biometers, the ANTERION (biometer A) and IOLMaster 700 (biometer B). In a prospective observational comparative case series study, we enrolled 198 eyes undergoing cataract surgery. The AL, CCT, ACD, LT, Kf, Ks, Km, astigmatism, WTW, acquired rate, and IOL power were assessed. McNemar tests compared the acquired rate, and the paired sample t-test compared the quantitative measurement results between the groups. Nineteen eyes were excluded owing to missing AL data for either biometer. Finally, data from 179 eyes were analyzed. Between the two devices, no significant difference was found in AL, astigmatism magnitude, J0, and J45, while significant differences existed in CCT, ACD, LT, Kf, Ks, Km, WTW, astigmatism axis, and IOL power; no statistical significance was found in the AL acquired rate (biometer A, 90.9% and biometer B, 93.9%). Approximately 65.4% of eyes demonstrated ≥0.5-D difference in IOL power between the two biometers. In conclusion, the two biometers showed significant differences in all measurements (CCT, ACD, LT, K, WTW, astigmatism axis, and IOL power), except for AL.

Repeatability of a new swept-source optical coherence tomographer and agreement with other three optical biometers

PURPOSE

To investigate the repeatability of Anterion and compare the agreement of ocular biometric measurements and predicted intraocular lens (IOL) powers with other three optical biometers.

METHODS

Flat keratometry (Kf), steep keratometry (Ks), J0 and 45 vectors, central cornea thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), and axial length (AL) from the Anterion, IOLMaster 700, Lenstar LS 900, and OA-2000 were recorded. The IOL powers were calculated with the Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, SRK/T, and Haigis formulas. The repeatability was evaluated using the within-subject standard deviation (Sw), repeatability coefficient (RC), coefficient of variation (COV), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Inter-device agreement between the four biometers was assessed with the 95% limits of agreement.

RESULTS

In total, 101 right eyes of 101 participants were enrolled. The Anterion showed good repeatability for all the included biometric parameters with all the CoV ≤ 0.30% and ICC ≥ 0.930 except for J45 with moderate repeatability (ICC was 0.849). Good agreement was found among the four devices for Kf, Ks, J0, J45, ACD, and AL. Generally, wide 95% LoA was found for the predicted IOL powers with the four IOL calculation formulas between the four devices.

CONCLUSIONS

The Anterion showed good repeatability of biometric measurements for most parameters. Good agreement among the four optical biometers was achieved for all the parameters except for CCT and the predicted IOL power. The AL values exhibited the best repeatability with Anterion and the best agreement among the biometers in our study.