Article Text

PDF
Evaluation of a new optical biometry device for measurements of ocular components and its comparison with IOLMaster
  1. Jinhai Huang1,2,
  2. Giacomo Savini1,3,
  3. Jian Li1,
  4. Weicong Lu1,2,
  5. Fan Wu1,
  6. Jing Wang1,
  7. Yaolin Li1,
  8. Yifan Feng4,
  9. Qinmei Wang1,2
  1. 1Department of Ophthalmology, School of Optometry and Ophthalmology and Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China
  2. 2Key Laboratory of Vision Science, Ministry of Health PR China, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China
  3. 3Studio Oculistico d'Azeglio, Bologna, Italy
  4. 4Department of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
  1. Correspondence to Professor Qinmei Wang, Department of Ophthalmology, Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, 270 West Xueyuan Road, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, 325027, China, wqm6{at}mail.eye.ac.cn

Abstract

Objective To assess the reliability of ocular component measurements with a new optical biometry device (AL-Scan; Nidek) and compare these measurements with those of the IOLMaster (Carl Zeiss Meditec) in patients with cataract.

Methods Sixty-eight cataractous eyes of 68 patients were included in the prospective study. To assess AL-Scan repeatability and reproducibility, central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth (ACD), keratometry (K) over 2.4 mm and 3.3 mm diameter, axial length (AL), white to white (WTW), and pupil distance (PD) values were measured by two operators. ACD, K, AL and WTW were also measured with the IOLMaster to investigate the level of agreement. Calculations of intraocular lens (IOL) power were compared between the two devices.

Results AL-Scan measurements were highly repeatable and reproducible, except for WTW and PD. Bland–Altman analysis showed good agreement between devices for AL, ACD and most K values. Compared with the IOLMaster, AL-Scan-derived K values using a diameter of 2.4 mm showed a narrower 95% limit of agreement (LoA) than those obtained with a diameter of 3.3 mm. However, poor agreement of WTW measurements was found. The 95% LoAs between devices for IOL calculations were smaller when based on AL-Scan K measurements using a diameter of 2.4 mm rather than 3.3 mm.

Conclusions The repeatability and reproducibility of AL-Scan was excellent for all parameters, except WTW and PD. Excluding WTW, good agreement was found between the AL-Scan and IOLMaster. The 2.4-mm diameter K value may be the most reliable choice for calculation of IOL power with the AL-Scan.

  • Imaging
  • Anterior chamber

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.