Comparison of Ocular Biometry and Refractive Outcomes Using IOL Master 500, IOL Master 700, and Lenstar LS900

Abstract

Satisfaction of patients undergoing cataract surgery is dependent on precise predictions of refractive outcomes. As accurate biometry and power precision of intraocular lens (IOL) have gained importance, development of various modern diagnostic techniques has enabled the control Purpose: To evaluate the agreement in ocular biometry outcomes measured by three different devices, the IOL Master 500, IOL Master 700, and Lenstar LS900, and compare the refractive outcomes after cataract surgery obtained using those three devices. Methods: Medical records of 178 eyes of 89 patients who underwent ocular biometry with the three devices were retrospectively reviewed, and 124 eyes met the inclusion criteria. Paired comparisons were performed for axial length (AL), mean keratometry (Km), and anterior chamber depth and quantified their agreement using Bland-Altman plots. Subgroup analyses were done according to the AL and the Km. Refractive outcomes were compared with respect to absolute prediction errors after cataract surgery in 54 eyes. Results: Among 124 eyes, 12, 3, and 5 eyes failed to be measured of AL by IOL Master 500, IOL Master 700 and Lenstar LS900, respectively. The AL measured by Lenstar LS900 was longer than that measured by IOL Master 500 and IOL Master 700 (p < 0.001, p = 0.002, respectively). Subgroup analysis revealed that these results were statistically significant only in long eyes (AL >25.5 mm). Km measured using the IOL Master 500 was steeper than that measured with the IOL Master 700 or Lenstar LS900 (p = 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). anterior chamber depth measured by IOL Master 500 was shallower than that measured by IOL Master 700 or Lenstar LS900 (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). Ocular biometry measurements by the three devices showed high agreement with narrow 95% limits of agreement. Absolute prediction errors from the 3 devices showed no statistically significant differences after cataract surgery. Conclusions: The IOL Master 700 and Lenstar LS900 demonstrated superior acquisition rates of biometric measurements compared with the IOL Master 500. Ocular biometry using the 3 different devices showed high agreement, although statistically significant differences were observed; however, since there was no difference in predicting the refractive outcomes, those differences are clinically negligible.

Biometry, Refractive Errors, and the Results of Cataract Surgery: A Large Sample Study

“…In the Asian population, Song et al [4] show similar keratometry average value when using Lenstar and IOL Master 700 and a bit bigger when using IOL Master 500, while Wickremasinghe et al [18] show much close values to ours, using an autorefractor-keratometer (Canon RK-5 Autorefractor Keratometer; Canon, Inc., Tokyo, Japan). Cuban researchers [15,32] using autorefractor-keratometers have previously reported slightly lower values.…”

“…Therefore, this issue has to be considered when comparing Lenstar and IOL Master as Cuban researchers did in a previous study [ 27 ], showing values closer to ours, with no significant differences between these two biometers. In contrast, Song et al [ 4 ] observed that ACD measured by IOL Master 500 was shallower than that measured by IOL Master 700 or Lenstar LS900 (Haag Steit AG, Koeniz, Switzerland)). In Song's study, the ACD mean value is similar to ours when measured by IOL Master 500, while values from IOL Master 700 and Lenstar are deeper.…”

“…However, an excellent agreement has been demonstrated between these two optical technologies, regarding axial length, anterior chamber depth, and steepest and flattest keratometric values [ 3 ]. In a recent comparative study, it was found that, despite IOLMaster 700 having a superior acquisition rate than IOLMaster 500, both devices showed good agreement, and found statistical differences were clinically negligible [ 4 ]. Meanwhile, knowing ocular biometric characteristics of a population is an important factor to be considered in designing intraocular lenses and improving IOL calculation methods for selecting the most appropriate lenses for patients [ 5 , 6 ].…”

Clinical Outcomes, Contrast Sensitivity, Reading Performance and Patient Satisfaction Following Bilateral Implantation of AT LARA 829MP EDoF IOLs

“…Refractive predictability was excellent in our study, with a mean postoperative residual SE of −0.17 D at 12 months and 95% of the eyes being within ±0.5 D of the target value. This suggests that advanced, swept source-based optical biometry 26 and modern IOL calculation formulae, such as the Barrett TK formula 27 , 28 used in the present study, may help cataract refractive surgeons to improve their chances of achieving postoperative targets closer to emmetropia in the majority of their cases.…”

Study of the Biological Developmental Characteristics of the Eye in Children After Laser Surgery for the Treatment of Retinopathy of Prematurity

“…The children were fully communicated with the examiner before the examination and natural blinking was permitted during the examination to avoid factors such as fixation differences and tear film rupture that could affect the results. The measurements were carried out by the same experienced technician ( 13 ). Three examinations were performed in each eye to assess the repeatability and reliability of the measured.…”