Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose To assess the differences and similarities in the corneal curvature obtained by two swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) devices, Scheimpflug imaging system and one ray tracing aberrometer in patients with cataracts. Moreover, this study aimed to compare the differences in posterior corneal (PK), total corneal (TK) and true net power (TNP) measurements among the IOLMaster 700, CASIA2, and Pentacam. Methods A total of 200 eyes of 200 patients (116 female, 58%) were enrolled in this study, with a mean age of 65.9 ± 9.5 years. The flattest (Kf), steepest (Ks), and mean cornal powers (Km), J 0 , and J 45 were obtained using two SS-OCT-based biometric devices, one rotating camera system and one ray-tracing aberrometer. The PK, TK and TNP values were also measured using these devices. To evaluate the differences and similarities between the devicves, the Friedman test, Pearson correlation coefficient (r), intraclass coefficient correlation (ICC) and Bland‒Altman plots with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) were used, and boxplots and stacked histograms were generated to describe the distributions of the data. Results There were no significant differences between the IOLMaster 700 and Pentacam for any of the keratometry values. Additionally, there were no significant differences between the IOLMaster 700 and iTrace in evaluating J 0 and J 45 . Bland‒Altman plots revealed relatively wide LoA widths, almost larger than 1 diopter for the keratometry values and almost larger than 0.5 diopter for J 0 and J 45 values among the four devices. In terms of PK and TK values, significant differences and low ICCs were found among the three devices. Conclusions Although strong correlations and good agreement were found among the IOLMaster700, CASIA2, Pentacam and iTrace for Kf, Ks, Km and J 0 , J 45 , it seems that the measurements should not be used interchangeably because of the wide LoA widths and the presence of significant differences among the devices. Similarly, due to significant differences and low ICCs, the PK, TK and TNP values obtained by IOLMaster 700, CASIA2, and Pentacam should not be used interchangeably.

To assess the agreement in automated corneal diameter (CD) and anterior chamber depth (ACD, measured from corneal epithelium to lens) distances measurements between the IOLMaster 500 and 700 optical biometers in myopic eyes. One hundred and sixteen eyes of 116 myopic patients aged between 21 to 60 years were included in this study. Measurements of CD and ACD distances were taken with each biometer for all patients in the same session. A -test and a -value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant when the measurements were compared. The agreement between biometers was studied by applying a Bland-Altman analysis. The mean CD values obtained using the IOLMaster 500 and 700 biometers were 12.26±0.35 mm and 12.13±0.34 mm, respectively. The mean ACD distance values were 3.61±0.29 mm and 3.62±0.31, for the IOLMaster 500 and 700 biometers, respectively. There were statistically significant differences between the two devices only for CD measurements ( <0.001), but not for ACD measurements ( =0.26). The limits of agreement obtained were wide in both types of measurements, being 0.422 mm for the CD distance and 0.389 mm for the ACD distance. There were statistically significant differences between the IOLMaster 500 and 700 biometers regarding CD but not in ACD measurements in healthy myopic eyes. These differences could be clinically significant in some cases. According to these results, medical judgement should be used to assess whether the two devices could be used interchangeably for CD and ACD measurements during the clinical practice.

This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of six intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas using total keratometry (TK) and standard keratometry (K) measurements from the IOLMaster 700 in various ocular subgroups. A total of 212 eyes were analyzed. The mean absolute error (MAE), standard deviation (SD) of prediction error, and the median absolute error (MedAE) were calculated for each formula. and the prediction accuracy was compared across different subgroups categorized by axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), and other ocular parameters. Results showed that the Barrett Universal II (BU II) formula consistently had the lowest MAEs and MedAEs in the overall sample and most subgroups. The BU II formula performed particularly well in subgroups with thin LT when using TK mode and in medium LT subgroups using K mode. Comparison between TK and K modes showed no consistent superiority, with each mode outperforming the other in specific subgroups. The accuracy of the BU II formula was not influenced by ocular parameters, suggesting its robustness across different patient groups. In conclusion, the BU II formula demonstrated superior accuracy compared to other formulas, especially in specific subgroups, and its performance remained consistent regardless of ocular measurement variations.

To assess the non-inferiority of mean absolute prediction error (APE) of the Argos (Movu, a Santec company) compared with the IOL Master 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) and Lenstar LS900 (Haag-Streit AG) biometers utilizing the Barrett Universal II (BUII) formula for power calculations in short, medium, and long axial length eyes. This was a retrospective chart review of prediction error from 3 biometers (Argos, IOLMaster 700, and Lenstar LS900). Biometer measurement order was determined using blocked randomization. Eligible charts were from eyes 50-85 years old, axial length between 20.00 mm and 30.00 mm, and had IOL implantation with the AcrySof IQ monofocal IOL (SN60WF) and AcrySof toric IOL (SN6AT3, SN6AT4). Preoperative planning was done with the BUII formula on all biometers, with a target of plano. The primary outcome measure was the mean absolute prediction error for each biometer using BUII. Specifically, the non-inferiority of Argos compared to the IOLMaster 700 and Lenstar LS900 using a non-inferiority margin of 0.25 D. The chart review identified 203 eyes from 123 patients. Mean APE for Argos overall and for each axial length group was non-inferior to that of IOLMaster 700 and Lenstar LS900. The overall mean APE was 0.25 ± 0.20 D for Argos compared to 0.25 ± 0.20 D for IOLMaster 700, and 0.25 ± 0.19 D for Lenstar LS900. The differences were not significant (p > 0.05). The percentages of eyes with APE 0.5 D or less were 90% for Argos, 89% for IOLMaster 700, and 89% for Lenstar LS900. The differences were not significant (p > 0.05). Overall mean APE was not significantly different with the Argos compared to IOLMaster 700 and Lenstar LS900 using the BUII formula, suggesting that the use of any of these devices can achieve good outcomes.

To compare the acquisition time necessary to obtain the optical biometry plus corneal power measurement using the IOLMaster 700 with central topography with that found using the standard IOLMaster 700 in combination with two corneal topographers, when acquiring biometry measurements during cataract evaluation. This prospective, observational, controlled study included 96 eyes of 96 cataract patients. Acquisition times were registered for different conditions: time required for one complete measurement with IOLMaster 700 with central topography, time required for one complete measurement with standard IOLMaster 700 (without central topography), time required for one complete measurement with standard IOLMaster 700 plus time required for one complete measurement with Cassini, and time required for one complete measurement with standard IOLMaster 700 plus time required for one complete measurement with Pentacam HR. In addition, the agreement between keratometry (K), total keratometry (TK) and equivalent K reading (EKR) parameters using the three devices was performed. The post hoc Tukey's test revealed that there were statistically significant differences for all pairwise comparisons (p < 0.001) except for the acquisition times of the IOLMaster with central topography and the standard IOLMaster 700 (p = 0.501). The acquisition time by the IOLMaster 700 with central topography takes approximately three less times than the use of a corneal topographer combined with a biometer. The agreement of K1, K2, TK1, TK2, EKR1 and EKR2 measurements between the three devices revealed statistically significant differences for all possible comparisons (p < 0.001) except for the comparison between the IOLMaster 700 and the Cassini for all parameters (p > 0.05). We consider that this is an efficient procedure that improves clinical flow. We also conclude that K readings obtained with the three devices cannot be used interchangeably since there are clinically relevant differences that may affect cataract surgery outcomes.

Background Precise measurement of ocular biometry is critical for determining intraocular lens power. Newly developed swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) - based ocular biometric devices, ANTERION and CASIA2 provide ocular biometric measurements as IOLMaster 700. This study aimed to assess agreement between three devices. Methods This retrospective comparative study includes patients with cataract who underwent ocular biometric measurements with three devices, ANTERION, CASIA2, and IOLMaster 700, at Seoul National University Hospital, in April 2020. Anterior keratometry, total keratometry, central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), and axial length (AL) were the main parameters for the comparison. To assess the agreement between the devices, intraclass coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) were used. Results A total of 47 eyes of 29 patients were measured with three devices. Average anterior keratometry showed excellent agreement (ICC ≥ 0.989), and the mean difference was less than 0.1 D. However, the ICC of the total average keratometry ranged from 0.808 to 0.952, and the difference was more than 0.43 D. The AL measured by ANTERION and IOLMaster 700 showed excellent agreement (ICC = 0.999), and the mean difference was 0.005 mm. The ANTERION and IOLMaster 700 did not obtain AL in six (12.8%) and three (6.4%) cases, respectively ( P  = 0.001 by Fisher’s exact test). The CCT, ACD, and LT also showed excellent agreement (ICC > 0.9). Conclusions The new SS-OCT-based devices, ANTERION, and CASIA2 showed a good agreement with IOLMaster 700 in measuring ocular biometry except for the total keratometry. The AL of ANTERION and IOLMaster 700 showed excellent agreement.

With the advancements in ocular biometric technology, there have been significant improvements in accurately and efficiently measuring ocular parameters. The aim of this study is to compare the reliability of biometric parameters obtained using a new frequency-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) biometer with the measurements obtained from swept-source OCT (SS-OCT) and optical low coherence reflectometry (OLCR) biometers. This study employed an observational cross-sectional design. Measurements of axial length (AL), flat and steep corneal keratometry (K1 and K2), and central corneal thickness (CCT) obtained using the The Colombo IOL were compared with those obtained with the IOLMaster 700 and SW-9000 devices. The agreement were evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland–Altman analyses. The differences of the measurements of the three increments were assessed by one-way ANONA. 73 right eyes of 73 healthy pediatric subjects were analyzed. The AL difference measured by Colombo IOL compared with IOLmaster700 and SW-9000 were 0.00 ± 0.02 mm and − 0.07 ± 0.05 mm, respectively ( P  > 0.05, ANOVA). There was no statistically significant difference in CCT, K1, and K2 among the three instruments (all P  > 0.05, ANOVA). The ICC values for AL, K1, K2, and CCT were 0.999, 0.996, 0.995, and 0.998, respectively. The Bland-Altman analysis showed an agreement of AL, K1, K2, and CCT with Colombo IOL and IOLMaster 700 spanned over 0.08 mm, 0.71D, 0.69D, and 12.17 μm, respectively. The agreement of AL, K1, K2, and CCT with Colombo IOL and SW-9000 spanned approximate 0.21 mm, 0.75D, 1.06D, and 14.37 μm, respectively. The new SD-OCT biometer and the SS-OCT biometer showed strong agreement in measuring AL and CCT in healthy pediatric subjects. This supports the reliability of the new SD-OCT biometer as an alternative for assessing these parameters. However, K1 and K2 could not be used interchangeably in clinical practice. Further research is needed to explore their applicability in different clinical settings and patient populations.\"light\" />

Purpose: To assess the repeatability of ocular measurements, particularly astigmatism, taken using the latest version of an swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) device, IOLMaster 700. Methods: This prospective observational study done in a private eye care centre. Study included 213 eyes of 152 patients diagnosed with cataract. Axial length (AL), Anterior corneal astigmatism (ΔK), Total corneal astigmatism (ΔTK), Aqueous depth (AD), Lens thickness (LT), Iris barycentre distance (IBD) and White to white distance (WTW) were analysed; three measurements were taken for each patient in the same sitting by the same examiner in an undilated state using the SS-OCT device. Repeatability was analysed using intraclass coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV) measures, and astigmatism values were transformed into vector components (J0/J45) and categorised based on magnitude. Results: Astigmatism vector components (J0/J45) showed poor repeatability (ICC < 0.5 and CV > 0), while iris coordinates (IBD) and astigmatism magnitude had good correlation (ICC > 0.9) but more variations between the readings which was least for magnitude ≥ 1.5D; however, rest of the parameters demonstrated excellent repeatability (ICC > 0.9 with P value < 0.05). Conclusion: IOLMaster 700 demonstrated good reliability for the parameters measured, although, for astigmatism and iris barycentre distance, more number of readings and cross reference with other devices may be required to get clinically accurate results.

Purpose: To compare the commonly used formulas for intraocular lens (IOL) selection using IOLMaster®700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec) and to evaluate the Barrett Universal II (BU-II) formula accuracy when using the Vivinex™ iSert® XY1 IOL (Hoya Corporation Medical Division). Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed that included patients who underwent uneventful cataract surgery with in-the-bag insertion of Vivinex™ iSert® XY1 IOL. Prediction errors at 3 months postoperative of IOLMaster® 700 with Haigis, Holladay 1, SRK/T, and BU-II formulas were compared. As a subgroup analysis, we focused on the axial length (AL) and IOL power. AL subgroup analysis was based on the following AL subgroups: short (<22.5 mm), medium (22.5-25.5 mm), and long (>25.5 mm). IOL power subgroup analysis was based on the following IOL power subgroups: low (≤18.0 diopters [D]), medium (18.5-24.0 D), and high (≥24.5 D). Results: This study included 590 eyes of 590 patients. Overall, the four IOL calculation formulas appeared to be similarly accurate. In the long AL subgroup, the BU-II formula had a significantly lower absolute error (AE) than the Holladay 1 formula. In the low-power subgroup, the BU-II formula had a significantly lower AE than the Holladay 1 and SRK/T formulas. On the other hand, in the high-power subgroup, the BU-II formula was significantly less accurate than the SRK/T formula and also appeared to be worse than the Holladay 1 formula (P = 0.052). Conclusion: The BU-II formula might be less accurate when using a Vivinex™ iSert® XY1 IOL of 24.5 D or greater.

Purpose The purpose was to evaluate the repeatability of a new swept-source optical biometer for measuring ocular biometric parameters. Methods Thirty subjects with healthy and phakic eyes were included in this study, and only one eye per participant was analysed. Each eye was measured five times with the IOLMaster 700 swept-source optical biometer (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). Axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD), central corneal thickness (CCT), lens thickness (LT), white-to-white (WTW), and K1 and K2 keratometric readings were evaluated. The repeatability of swept-source biometry was evaluated on the basis of five measurements captured for each patient. Results The repeatability limits for the axial measurements AL, ACD, CCT, and LT were 0.03, 0.07, 0.004, and 0.11 mm, respectively. For the WTW distance and both keratometry readings, the repeatability limits were 0.20, 0.06, and 0.05 mm, respectively. The AL resulted in the lowest coefficient of variation, and the LT had the highest one. The spherical equivalent showed statistically significant negative correlations with the AL and ACD. Conclusion Swept-source optical biometry showed high repeatability performance for all biometric parameters in healthy eyes, where the correlation between the spherical equivalent and AL showed the strongest value.