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
Observational Study
. 2019 Jan 24;19(1):30.
doi: 10.1186/s12886-019-1036-y.

Accuracy of swept-source optical coherence tomography based biometry for intraocular lens power calculation: a retrospective cross-sectional study

Youngju An  1 , Eun-Kyoung Kang  2 , Hyojin Kim  3 , Min-Ji Kang  4 , Yong-Soo Byun  4 , Choun-Ki Joo  5   6
Affiliations
Observational Study

Accuracy of swept-source optical coherence tomography based biometry for intraocular lens power calculation: a retrospective cross-sectional study

Youngju An et al. BMC Ophthalmol. .

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the accuracy of biometric measurements by a swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) based biometry for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation.

Methods: This retrospective observational study enrolled 431 patients undergoing cataract surgery. The charts were reviewed to investigate the failure rate of axial length (AL) measurement of the SS-OCT biometer, partial coherence interferometry (PCI), and A-scan ultrasonography (US) according to cataract type and severity. AL and keratometry in 164 eyes with the same IOL inserted were measured using the SS-OCT biometer, PCI, and A-scan US. The SRK/T formula was used to calculate IOL power. The mean absolute error (MAE) and percentage of eyes with a prediction error (PE) of ±0.50 D were compared.

Results: The AL measurement failure rate was 0.00% for A-scan US, 2.32% for the SS-OCT biometer, and 15.31% for PCI. The number of eyes measured using three devices (SS-OCT biometer, PCI, and A-scan US) was 128 (Group A) and the number of eyes measured using two devices (SS-OCT biometer and A-scan US) was 36 (Group B). The score of posterior subcapsular opacity was significantly different between two groups (p < .001). The SS-OCT biometer and PCI showed significantly lower MAE compared to A-scan US in Group A (p = 0.027). Using SS-OCT biometer, MAE showed no significant difference between Group A (0.36 ± 0.27) and Group B (0.36 ± 0.31) (p = 0.785). Whereas, MAE of A-scan US was significantly higher than Group A (0.47 ± 0.39) in Group B (0.64 ± 0.36) (p = 0.023).

Conclusions: Using biometry with advanced OCT is useful in clinical practice as it is more effective in obtaining biometric measurements in the eyes with PSC and provides accurate measurements for IOL power calculation regardless of cataract type and severity.

Trial registration: Retrospectively registered. Registration number: KC16RISI1020 . Registered 03 January 2018.

Keywords: Cataract; Intraocular lens power calculation; Partial coherence interferometry; Swept-source optical coherence tomography.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital (Korea) and the requirement for individual consent was waived (IRB Registry Number KC16RISI1020).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The distribution of absolute prediction error using A-scan US, PCI, and SS–OCT biometer in SRK/T formulas. Group A; PCI feasible, Group B; PCI unfeasible (US = Ultrasonography, PCI = Partial coherence interferometry, SS–OCT = swept-source optical coherence tomography, NS = not significant) *p–value is for Mann–Whitney U test.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Olsen T. Sources of error in intraocular lens power calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1992;18:125–129. doi: 10.1016/S0886-3350(13)80917-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Olsen T. Calculation of intraocular lens power: a review. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2007;85:472–485. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2007.00879.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Vogel A, Dick HB, Krummenauer F. Reproducibility of optical biometry using partial coherence interferometry: intraobserver and interobserver reliability. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001;27:1961–1968. doi: 10.1016/S0886-3350(01)01214-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Huang J, McAlinden C, Su B, Pesudovs K, Feng Y, Hua Y, et al. The effect of cycloplegia on the lenstar and the IOLMaster biometry. Optom Vis Sci. 2012;89:1691–1696. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3182772f4f. - DOI - PubMed
    1. McAlinden C, Wang Q, Pesudovs K, Yang X, Bao F, Yu A, et al. Axial length measurement failure rates with the IOLMaster and Lenstar LS 900 in eyes with cataract. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0128929. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128929. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types