Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2015 Apr-Jun;22(2):233-7.
doi: 10.4103/0974-9233.151884.

Comparison of the Corneal Power Measurements with the TMS4-Topographer, Pentacam HR, IOL Master, and Javal Keratometer

Zahra Dehnavi  1 , Mehdi Khabazkhoob  2 , Ali Mirzajani  1 , Mahmood Jabbarvand  3 , Abbasali Yekta  4 , Ebrahim Jafarzadehpur  1
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of the Corneal Power Measurements with the TMS4-Topographer, Pentacam HR, IOL Master, and Javal Keratometer

Zahra Dehnavi et al. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2015 Apr-Jun.

Abstract

Purpose: The aim was to compare the corneal curvature and power measured with a corneal topographer, Scheimpflug camera, optical biometer, and Javal keratometer.

Materials and methods: A total of 76 myopic individuals who were candidates for photorefractive keratectomy were selected in a cross-sectional study. Manual keratometry (Javal Schiotz type; Haag-Streit AG, Koeniz, Switzerland), automated keratometry (IOL Master version 3.02, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany), topography (TMS4, Tomey, Erlangen, Germany), and Pentacam HR (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) were performed for all participants. The 95% limits of agreement (LOAs) were reported to evaluate the agreement between devices.

Results: The mean corneal power measurements were 44.3 ± 1.59, 44.25 ± 1.59, 43.68 ± 1.44, and 44.31 ± 1.61 D with a Javal keratometer, TMS4-topographer, the Pentacam and IOL Master respectively. Only the IOL Master showed no significant difference with Javal keratometer in measuring the corneal power (P = 0.965). The correlations of the Javal keratometer with TMS4-topography, Pentacam, and IOL Master was 0.991. 0.982, and 0.993 respectively. The 95% LOAs of the Javal keratometer with TMS4-topography, Pentacam, and IOL Master were - 0.361 to 0.49, -0.01 to 1.14, and - 0.36 to 0.36 D, respectively.

Conclusion: Although the correlation of Pentacam, TMS4-topography, IOL Master, and Javal keratometer in measuring keratometry was high, only the IOL Master showed no significant difference with the Javal keratometer. The IOL Master had the best agreement with Javal keratometry.

Keywords: Agreement; Corneal Power; Correlation; IOL Master; Pentacam; TMS4-Topographer.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Correlation between Javal-Schiotz keratometer and TMS4-topographer measurements of corneal power (diopters)
Figure 2
Figure 2
Bland-Altman plots demonstrating 95% limits of agreement between Javal-Schiotz keratometer and TMS4-topographer in measuring corneal power (diopter)
Figure 3
Figure 3
Correlation between Javal-Schiotz keratometer and Pentacam measurements of corneal power (diopters)
Figure 4
Figure 4
Bland-Altman plots demonstrating 95% limits of agreement between Javal-Schiotz keratometer and Pentacam in measuring corneal power (diopters)
Figure 5
Figure 5
Correlation between Javal-Schiotz keratometer and IOL master measurements of corneal power (diopters)
Figure 6
Figure 6
Bland-Altman plots demonstrating 95% limits of agreement between Javal-Schiotz keratometer and IOL master in measuring corneal power (diopters)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Shirayama M, Wang L, Weikert MP, Koch DD. Comparison of corneal powers obtained from 4 different devices. Am J Ophthalmol. 2009;148:528–535.e1. - PubMed
    1. Read SA, Collins MJ, Iskander DR, Davis BA. Corneal topography with Scheimpflug imaging and videokeratography: Comparative study of normal eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35:1072–81. - PubMed
    1. Gutmark R, Guyton DL. Origins of the keratometer and its evolving role in ophthalmology. Surv Ophthalmol. 2010;55:481–97. - PubMed
    1. Woodmass J, Rocha G. A comparison of Scheimpflug imaging simulated and Holladay equivalent keratometry values with partial coherence interferometry keratometry measurements in phakic eyes. Can J Ophthalmol. 2009;44:700–4. - PubMed
    1. Savini G, Barboni P, Carbonelli M, Hoffer KJ. Agreement between Pentacam and videokeratography in corneal power assessment. J Refract Surg. 2009;25:534–8. - PubMed

Publication types