IOLMaster 700测量白内障患者眼部相关 生物参数的分析

doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn115909-20210105-00007

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (15)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (1010 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS) Supporting Info

Guide

Abstract Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of IOLMaster 700 in clinical application by analyzing the ocular related biometric parameters measured by IOLMaster 700 and compared with those of Lenstar LS900 in cataract patients. Methods: In this case series study, 71 cataract patients who underwent optical biometry in Foshan Second People's Hospital were enrolled from September to October 2019. Biometric parameters measured both by the IOLMaster 700 and Lenstar LS900 were compared. The axial length (AL), anterior chamber (ACD), lens thickness (LT), white to white (WTW), and mean corneal curvature (Km) were measured. Paired t test was used to compare the differences of the parameters. Bland-Altman plots were used to analyze the consistency. McNemar test was used to analyze the detection rate of AL. Results: There was no significant difference in AL and Km between IOLMaster 700 and Lenstar LS900 (t=1.728, P=0.088; t=0.804, P=0.424). There were significant differences in ACD, LT and WTW between the two biometers (t=-5.862, P<0.001; t=3.333, P=0.001; t=4.709, P<0.001). AL, ACD, LT, WTW and Km were not consistent. The detection rate of AL measured by IOLMaster 700 was higher than that by Lenstar LS900 (P=0.016). Conclusions: The IOLMaster 700 measurements do not show good consistency with those of Lenstar LS900 in clinical cataract patients. However the IOLMaster 700 has a lower detection failure rate in AL.

Key words： IOLMaster 700 Lenstar LS900 axial length biometric parameters detection rate

Received: 05 January 2021

PACS:

Fund:

Corresponding Authors: Shigang Yan, Department of Ophthalmology, Foshan Second People's Hospital, Foshan 528000, China (Email: fsyansg@126.com)

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors

Cite this article:

URL:

https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/10.3760/cma.j.cn115909-20210105-00007 OR https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/Y2021/V23/I6/446

[1]	Olsen T. Calculation of intraocular lens power: A review. Acta Ophthalmol Scand, 2007, 85(5): 472-485. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600- 0420.2007.00879.x.
[2]	Fontes BM, Fontes BM, Castro E. Intraocular lens power calculation by measuring axial length with partial optical coherence and ultrasonic biometry. Arq Bras Oftalmol, 2011, 74(3): 166-170. DOI: 10.1590/s0004-27492011000300004.
[3]	Akman A, Asena L, Güngör SG. Evaluation and comparison of the new swept source OCT-based IOLMaster 700 with the IOLMaster 500. Br J Ophthalmol, 2016, 100(9): 1201-1205. DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307779.
[4]	Cruysberg LP, Doors M, Verbakel F, et al. Evaluation of the Lenstar LS 900 non-contact biometer. Br J Ophthalmol, 2010, 94(1): 106-110. DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2009.161729.bjo.2009.161729.
[5]	曲勃, 刘丹霞, 张旺, 等. IOL master 700和Lenstar测量眼轴的结果比较. 实用临床医药杂志, 2019, 23(12): 19-22. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201912006.
[6]	Arriola-Villalobos P, Almendral-Gómez J, Garzón N, et al. Agreement and clinical comparison between a new swept-source optical coherence tomography-based optical biometer and an optical low-coherence reflectometry biometer. Eye (Lond), 2017, 31(3): 437-442. DOI: 10.1038/eye.2016.241.
[7]	Song JS, Yoon DY, Hyon JY, et al. Comparison of ocular biometry and refractive outcomes using IOL master 500, IOL master 700, and Lenstar LS900. Korean J Ophthalmol, 2020, 34(2): 126-132. DOI: 10.3341/kjo.2019.010234.126.
[8]	Norrby S. Sources of error in intraocular lens power calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2008, 34(3): 368-376. DOI: 10.1016/ j.jcrs.2007.10.031.
[9]	Høvding G, Natvik C, Sletteberg O. The refractive error after implantation of a posterior chamber intraocular lens. The accuracy of IOL power calculation in a hospital practice. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh), 1994, 72(5): 612-616. DOI: 10.1111/ j.1755-3768.1994.tb07188.x.
[10]	Olsen T. Sources of error in intraocular lens power calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg, 1992, 18(2): 125-129. DOI: 10.1016/ s0886-3350(13)80917-0.
[11]	张婉琪, 程缨淋, 黄惠春, 等. 高度近视合并白内障患者术后有效晶状体位置的初步临床研究. 眼科学报, 2019, 34(3): 136-140. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.1000-4432.2019.06.10.
[12]	Hoffer KJ, Hoffmann PC, Savini G. Comparison of a new optical biometer using swept-source optical coherence tomography and a biometer using optical low-coherence reflectometry. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2016, 42(8): 1165-1172. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.07.013.S0886-3350(16)30258-9.
[13]	Eibschitz-Tsimhoni M, Tsimhoni O, Archer SM, et al. Effect of axial length and keratometry measurement error on intraocular lens implant power prediction formulas in pediatric patients. J AAPOS, 2008, 12(2): 173-176. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2007.10. 012.
[14]	Reitblat O, Levy A, Kleinmann G, et al. Accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation using three optical biometry measurement devices: The OA-2000, Lenstar-LS900 and IOLMaster-500. Eye (Lond), 2018, 32(7): 1244-1252. DOI: 10.1038/s41433-018- 0063-x.
[15]	McAlinden C, Wang Q, Pesudovs K, et al. Axial length measurement failure rates with the IOLMaster and Lenstar LS 900 in eyes with cataract. PLoS One, 2015, 10(6): e0128929. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128929.