Predictability of intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with average axial lengths: optical versus ultrasonic biometry
Objective The aim of this study was to compare the partial coherence interferometry to ultrasound (US)-based biometry in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in eyes with average axial length (AL). Patients and methods One hundred eyes with AL of 21–24 mm having cataract as the only ocular patho...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2019-01-01
|
| Series: | Delta Journal of Ophthalmology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.djo.eg.net/article.asp?issn=1110-9173;year=2019;volume=20;issue=2;spage=68;epage=73;aulast=Ellakwa |
| _version_ | 1818824400395304960 |
|---|---|
| author | Amin F Ellakwa Mohammed S Abd Elaziz Marwa A Zaky Waleed M Nagy |
| author_facet | Amin F Ellakwa Mohammed S Abd Elaziz Marwa A Zaky Waleed M Nagy |
| author_sort | Amin F Ellakwa |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objective The aim of this study was to compare the partial coherence interferometry to ultrasound (US)-based biometry in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in eyes with average axial length (AL).
Patients and methods One hundred eyes with AL of 21–24 mm having cataract as the only ocular pathology were included in the study from November 2016 to October 2018. Fifty eyes were subjected to US biometry and 50 eyes were subjected to Zeiss IOL-Master optical biometry followed by IOL power calculation. All patients underwent phacoemulsification by experienced surgeons with intra-bagal implantation of one-piece soft hydrophilic intraocular lens. AL, keratometric reading, anterior chamber depth, and intraocular lens power were compared. Actual postoperative spherical equivalent (SE), mean absolute error, and predicted error were calculated.
Results No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups regarding the AL, keratometric reading, anterior chamber depth, IOLs power, predicted postoperative SE, and actual postoperative SE (P=0.36, 0.20, 0.57, 0.39, 0.31, and 0.09, respectively). The US group had significantly higher predicted error and mean absolute error than IOL-Master group (P=0.03 and 0.01, respectively).
Conclusion IOL-Master optical biometry is slightly more accurate than US biometry for intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with average AL, whereas A-scan biometry is still a cost-effective method. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-18T23:55:16Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-a942a622c0b84e1e8496e54b90e66a3d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1110-9173 2090-4835 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-18T23:55:16Z |
| publishDate | 2019-01-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Delta Journal of Ophthalmology |
| spelling | doaj.art-a942a622c0b84e1e8496e54b90e66a3d2022-12-21T20:46:43ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsDelta Journal of Ophthalmology1110-91732090-48352019-01-01202687310.4103/DJO.DJO_7_19Predictability of intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with average axial lengths: optical versus ultrasonic biometryAmin F EllakwaMohammed S Abd ElazizMarwa A ZakyWaleed M NagyObjective The aim of this study was to compare the partial coherence interferometry to ultrasound (US)-based biometry in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in eyes with average axial length (AL). Patients and methods One hundred eyes with AL of 21–24 mm having cataract as the only ocular pathology were included in the study from November 2016 to October 2018. Fifty eyes were subjected to US biometry and 50 eyes were subjected to Zeiss IOL-Master optical biometry followed by IOL power calculation. All patients underwent phacoemulsification by experienced surgeons with intra-bagal implantation of one-piece soft hydrophilic intraocular lens. AL, keratometric reading, anterior chamber depth, and intraocular lens power were compared. Actual postoperative spherical equivalent (SE), mean absolute error, and predicted error were calculated. Results No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups regarding the AL, keratometric reading, anterior chamber depth, IOLs power, predicted postoperative SE, and actual postoperative SE (P=0.36, 0.20, 0.57, 0.39, 0.31, and 0.09, respectively). The US group had significantly higher predicted error and mean absolute error than IOL-Master group (P=0.03 and 0.01, respectively). Conclusion IOL-Master optical biometry is slightly more accurate than US biometry for intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with average AL, whereas A-scan biometry is still a cost-effective method.http://www.djo.eg.net/article.asp?issn=1110-9173;year=2019;volume=20;issue=2;spage=68;epage=73;aulast=Ellakwaaxial lengthpartial coherence interferometryultrasound biometry |
| spellingShingle | Amin F Ellakwa Mohammed S Abd Elaziz Marwa A Zaky Waleed M Nagy Predictability of intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with average axial lengths: optical versus ultrasonic biometry Delta Journal of Ophthalmology axial length partial coherence interferometry ultrasound biometry |
| title | Predictability of intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with average axial lengths: optical versus ultrasonic biometry |
| title_full | Predictability of intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with average axial lengths: optical versus ultrasonic biometry |
| title_fullStr | Predictability of intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with average axial lengths: optical versus ultrasonic biometry |
| title_full_unstemmed | Predictability of intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with average axial lengths: optical versus ultrasonic biometry |
| title_short | Predictability of intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with average axial lengths: optical versus ultrasonic biometry |
| title_sort | predictability of intraocular lens power calculation in eyes with average axial lengths optical versus ultrasonic biometry |
| topic | axial length partial coherence interferometry ultrasound biometry |
| url | http://www.djo.eg.net/article.asp?issn=1110-9173;year=2019;volume=20;issue=2;spage=68;epage=73;aulast=Ellakwa |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT aminfellakwa predictabilityofintraocularlenspowercalculationineyeswithaverageaxiallengthsopticalversusultrasonicbiometry AT mohammedsabdelaziz predictabilityofintraocularlenspowercalculationineyeswithaverageaxiallengthsopticalversusultrasonicbiometry AT marwaazaky predictabilityofintraocularlenspowercalculationineyeswithaverageaxiallengthsopticalversusultrasonicbiometry AT waleedmnagy predictabilityofintraocularlenspowercalculationineyeswithaverageaxiallengthsopticalversusultrasonicbiometry |