Agreement between Two Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometers and a Partial Coherence Interferometer
3
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: To evaluate the level of agreement between ANTERION (Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany), OA-2000(Tomey, Nagoya, Japan), and IOLMaster 500 (Carl Zeiss AG, Jena, Germany). Methods: Fifty-one eyes of 51 patients were included in the study. Flat keratometry (K) and steep K, vector componentof astigmatism (Jackson cross-cylinder at 0° and 90° [J0] and Jackson cross-cylinder at 45° and 135° [J45]), anterior chamberdepth, and axial length were compared using the three devices. Repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted tocompare the mean values of the biometrics. Pearson correlation test was conducted to analyze the correlations of the measuredvalues, and a Bland-Altman plot was used to assess the agreement between the three devices. The predicted intraocularlens power of each device was compared to the others using the SRK/T, Haigis, Barrett Universal II, and Kane formulas. Results: All K values measured using ANTERION were flatter than those of other instruments. However, good agreement wasobserved for flat K (ANTERION - OA-2000; 95% limits of agreement [LoA], 0.86 diopters [D]) and steep K (ANTERION - OA-2000; 95% LoA, 0.93 D) and OA-2000 - IOLMaster 500 (95% LoA, 0.93 D). J0 and J45 vector components of astigmatism werenot statistically different; however, the agreements were poor between the devices (95% LoA ≥1.97 D). Anterior chamberdepth values of ANTERION and OA-2000 were interchangeable (95% LoA, 0.15 mm). The axial length showed a high agreement(95% LoA ≤0.17 mm) among the three devices. The predicted intraocular lens powers of the three devices were notinterchangeable regardless of formulas (95% LoA ≥1.04 D). Conclusions: Significant differences in ocular biometrics were observed between ANTERION and the other two devices. Thisstudy demonstrated that only axial length showed good agreement among devices.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the level of agreement between ANTERION (Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany), OA-2000(Tomey, Nagoya, Japan), and IOLMaster 500 (Carl Zeiss AG, Jena, Germany). Methods: Fifty-one eyes of 51 patients were included in the study. Flat keratometry (K) and steep K, vector componentof astigmatism (Jackson cross-cylinder at 0° and 90° [J0] and Jackson cross-cylinder at 45° and 135° [J45]), anterior chamberdepth, and axial length were compared using the three devices. Repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted tocompare the mean values of the biometrics. Pearson correlation test was conducted to analyze the correlations of the measuredvalues, and a Bland-Altman plot was used to assess the agreement between the three devices. The predicted intraocularlens power of each device was compared to the others using the SRK/T, Haigis, Barrett Universal II, and Kane formulas. Results: All K values measured using ANTERION were flatter than those of other instruments. However, good agreement wasobserved for flat K (ANTERION - OA-2000; 95% limits of agreement [LoA], 0.86 diopters [D]) and steep K (ANTERION - OA-2000; 95% LoA, 0.93 D) and OA-2000 - IOLMaster 500 (95% LoA, 0.93 D). J0 and J45 vector components of astigmatism werenot statistically different; however, the agreements were poor between the devices (95% LoA ≥1.97 D). Anterior chamberdepth values of ANTERION and OA-2000 were interchangeable (95% LoA, 0.15 mm). The axial length showed a high agreement(95% LoA ≤0.17 mm) among the three devices. The predicted intraocular lens powers of the three devices were notinterchangeable regardless of formulas (95% LoA ≥1.04 D). Conclusions: Significant differences in ocular biometrics were observed between ANTERION and the other two devices. Thisstudy demonstrated that only axial length showed good agreement among devices.
참고문헌 (35)
- Olsen T, "Calculation of intraocular lens power : a review", Acta Ophthalmol Scand, 85, pp.472~485 (2007)
- Haigis W, "Comparison of immersion ultrasound biometry and partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens calculation according to Haigis", Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 238, pp.765~773 (2000)
- Lam AK, "The repeatability and accuracy of axial length and anterior chamber depth measurements from the IOLMaster", Ophthalmic Physiol Opt, 21, pp.477~483 (2001)
- Goebels S, "Comparison of 3 biometry devices in cataract patients", J Cataract Refract Surg, 41, pp.2387~2393 (2015)
- Chan PP, "Anterior chamber angle imaging with swept-source optical coherence tomography : comparison between CASIAII and ANTERION", Sci Rep, 10, pp.18771~ (2020)
- Tana-Rivero P, "Agreement between 2 swept-source OCT biometers and a Scheimpflug partial coherence interferometer", J Cataract Refract Surg, 47, pp.488~495 (2021)
- Schiano-Lomoriello D, "Repeatability of automated measurements by a new anterior segment optical coherence tomographer and biometer and agreement with standard devices", Sci Rep, 11, pp.983~ (2021)
- Oh R, "Comparison of ocular biometric measurements in patients with cataract using three swept-source optical coherence tomography devices", BMC Ophthalmol, 21, pp.62~ (2021)
- Fisus AD, "Comparison of 2 sweptsource optical coherence tomography-based biometry devices", J Cataract Refract Surg, 47, pp.87~92 (2021)
- Hoffer KJ, "Definition of ACD", Ophthalmology, 118, pp.1484~ (2011)
- Goto S, "Comparison of composite and segmental methods for acquiring optical axial length with swept-source optical coherence tomography", Sci Rep, 10, pp.4474~ (2020)
- Kim KY, "Comparison study of the axial length measured using the new swept-source optical coherence tomography ANTERION and the partial coherence interferometry IOL master", PLoS One, 15, pp.e0244590~ (2020)
- Hua Y, "Precision(repeatability and reproducibility)of ocular parameters obtained by the Tomey OA-2000 biometer compared to the IOLMaster in healthy eyes", PLoS One, 13, pp.e0193023~ (2018)
- Santodomingo-Rubido J, "A new non-contact optical device for ocular biometry", Br J Ophthalmol, 86, pp.458~462 (2002)
- Hashemi H, "Keratometry in children: comparison between auto-refractokeratometer, rotating scheimpflug imaging, and biograph", J Optom, 12, pp.99~110 (2019)
- Thibos LN, "Power vectors : an application of Fourier analysis to the description and statistical analysis of refractive error", Optom Vis Sci, 74, pp.367~375 (1997)
- Hashemi H, "Agreement between Pentacam and handheld Auto-Refractor", Keratometer for keratometry measurement, 2019, pp.12, 232~239
- Beato JN, "Agreement between IOLMaster 500 and Pentacam HR for keratometry assessment in type 2 diabetic and non-diabetic patients", Int J Ophthalmol, 13, pp.920~926 (2020)
- Liao X, "Agreement of ocular biometric measurements in young healthy eyes between IOLMaster 700 and OA-2000", Sci Rep, 10, pp.3134~ (2020)
- Elbaz U, "Comparison of different techniques of anterior chamber depth and keratometric measurements", Am J Ophthalmol, 143, pp.48~53 (2007)
- Shetty N, "Repeatability of biometry measured by three devices and its impact on predicted intraocular lens power", J Cataract Refract Surg, 47, pp.585~592 (2021)
- Chan TC, "Comparison of two novel swept-source optical coherence tomography devices to a partial coherence interferometry-based biometer", Sci Rep, 11, pp.14853~ (2021)
- McAlinden C, "Axial length measurement failure rates with biometers using swept-source optical coherence tomography compared to partial-coherence interferometry and optical low-coherence interferometry", Am J Ophthalmol, 173, pp.64~69 (2017)
- Jasvinder S, "Agreement analysis of LENSTAR with other techniques of biometry", Eye(Lond), 25, pp.717~724 (2011)
- Chylack LT Jr, "The lens opacities classification system III. The Longitudinal Study of Cataract Study Group", Arch Ophthalmol, 111, pp.831~836 (1993)
- Kongsap P, "Comparison of a new optical biometer and a standard biometer in cataract patients", Eye Vis(Lond), 3, pp.27~ (2016)
- Ghaffari R, "Assessing the validity of measurements of swept-source and partial coherence interferometry devices in cataract patients", Optom Vis Sci, 96, pp.745~750 (2019)
- Xiong S, "Comparison of refractive measures of three autorefractors in children and adolescents", Optom Vis Sci, 94, pp.894~902 (2017)
- Anderson DF, "Global prevalence and economic and humanistic burden of astigmatism in cataract patients : a systematic literature review", Clin Ophthalmol, 12, pp.439~452 (2018)
- Norrby S, "Sources of error in intraocular lens power calculation", J Cataract Refract Surg, 34, pp.368~376 (2008)
- McAlinden C, "Axial length measurement failure rates with the IOLMaster and Lenstar LS 900 in eyes with cataract", PLoS One, 10, pp.e0128929~ (2015)
- Shetty R, "Repeatability and agreement of three Scheimpflug-based imaging systems for measuring anterior segment parameters in keratoconus", Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 55, pp.5263~5268 (2014)
- RetzlaffJA, "Development of the SRK", T intraocular lens implant power calculation formula, 1990, pp.16, 333~340
- Melles RB, "Accuracy of intraocular lens calculation formulas", Ophthalmology, 125, pp.169~178 (2018)
- Connell BJ, "Comparison of the Kane formula with existing formulas for intraocular lens power selection", BMJ Open Ophthalmol, 4, pp.e000251~ (2019)