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
. 2019 May 18;12(5):844-847.
doi: 10.18240/ijo.2019.05.23. eCollection 2019.

Comparison of OA-2000 and IOL Master 500 using in cataract patients with high myopia

Affiliations

Comparison of OA-2000 and IOL Master 500 using in cataract patients with high myopia

Ya-Li Du et al. Int J Ophthalmol. .

Abstract

This study was designed to compare optical biometry measurements and predicted refraction in cataract patients with high myopia [axial length (AL) ≥26 mm] using OA-2000 and IOL Master 500. Ocular biometry measurements were performed using both biometers before surgery. Uneventful cataract surgery was performed in all patients. Postoperative manifest refraction was obtained 3wk after surgery or later. A total of 67 eyes were examined. The AL, keratometry (K), and anterior chamber depth (ACD) of the two biometers showed excellent agreement. Predicted errors were similar and a strong positive correlation was observed (r=0.909). Out of 21 eyes (31.34%) with unsuccessful AL readings using the IOL Master 500, 20 eyes of them could be measured using OA-2000. Therefore, the biometric parameters measured by the two biometers showed good agreement. However, OA-2000 had a lower AL measurement failure rate.

Keywords: IOL Master 500; IOL power calculation; OA-2000; biometry measurement; cataract; high myopia.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Bland-Altman plots comparing measurements of the OA-2000 and IOL Master 500
A: Axial length (AL); B: Keratometry (K); C: Anterior chamber depth (ACD); D: Mean absolute refractive error (MAE).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Yokoi T, Moriyama M, Hayashi K, Shimada N, Ohno-Matsui K. Evaluation of refractive error after cataract surgery in highly myopic eyes. Int Ophthalmol. 2013;33(4):343–348. - PubMed
    1. Jeong J, Song H, Lee JK, Chuck RS, Kwon JW. The effect of ocular biometric factors on the accuracy of various IOL power calculation formulas. BMC Ophthalmol. 2017;17(1):62. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Drexler W, Findl O, Menapace R, Rainer G, Vass C, Hitzenberger CK, Fercher AF. Partial coherence interferometry: a novel approach to biometry in cataract surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;126(4):524–534. - PubMed
    1. Wang W, Miao YX, Savini G, McAlinden C, Chen H, Hu Q, Wang Q, Huang J. Precision of a new ocular biometer in eyes with cataract using swept source optical coherence tomography combined with Placido-disk corneal topography. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):13736. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Goebels S, Pattmöller M, Eppig T, Cayless A, Seitz B, Langenbucher A. Comparison of 3 biometry devices in cataract patients. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015;41(11):2387–2393. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources