3rd Generation Formulas and Intraocular Lens Calculation with IOLMaster®. Refractive Results in 101 Eyes and Relationship with Axial Length

Ramalho, M; Vaz, Fernando; Pedrosa, C; Mota, Mafalda; Coutinho, Inês; Lopes, A. S.; Melo, Antonio Alves de; Prieto, Isabel

doi:10.15234/vpa.v15i1.288

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Difference with WTW measurement could have significant implications for those surgeons who use new generation formulas that consider this parameter in pseudophakic eyes, but also for selecting the lens size in phakic intraocular lenses. The knowledge of this value contributes to increase the accuracy after cataract surgery predicting the postoperative intraocular position [1,2]. It also helps to avoid vaulting-related issues in phakic intraocular lens implantation, since, for example, undersized or oversized lens may result in cataract development or angle-closure glaucoma, respectively [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agreement of white-to-white measurements with swept-source OCT, Scheimpflug and color LED devices

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To assess the interchangeability of different devices for measuring white-to-white (WTW) distance. Methods WTW distance was measured in 53 eyes of 53 patients using Anterion swept-source optical coherence topographer (SS-OCT), IOLMaster 700 SS-OCT, Pentacam HR Scheimpflug and Cassini color LED. Statistical analysis was done by means of the Friedman test and the post hoc Tukey test. The Bland-Altman analysis was applied to carry out pairwise comparisons with the average difference, 95% confidence interval of the average difference and limits of agreement 95% (LoA). Results WTW values obtained by the Anterion, IOLMaster 700, Pentacam HR and Cassini were: 11.84 ± 0.41 mm, 11.96 ± 0.41 mm, 11.68 ± 0.38 mm and 12.65 ± 0.52 mm, respectively. Statistically significant differences were found in all pairwise comparison (p \ 0.001). The lowest mean difference was found between the Anterion and IOLMaster 700 (-0.11 mm) and the highest between the Pentacam HR and Cassini (-0.96 mm). The widest LoA ranges were those that compared any device with the Cassini. LoA ranges when the other three devices were compared among them were similar: Anterion versus IOLMaster 700, Anterion versus Pentacam HR and IOLMaster versus Pentacam HR (about 0.2 mm). Conclusions Our results show that there were statistically significant differences in WTW measurement among the four devices, but under a clinical point of view, we believe that Anterion and IOLMaster 700 may be considered interchangeable and so Anterion and Pentacam HR, however, IOLMaster 700 and Pentacam HR may not and neither is Cassini with any of the other three devices.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%