Won Lee Seung; Gun Kim Young; Jun Lee Seung; Kyun Kim Do; Woo Kwak Hyung; Young Yu Seung

doi:10.3341/jkos.2009.50.8.1226

Journal List > J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > v.50(8) > 1008339

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Seung, Young, Seung, Do, Hyung, and Seung: Comparison of IOLMasterⓇ and A-Scan Ultrasound: Change in Axial Length After Vitrectomy in Macular Disease

Original Article

J Korean Ophthalmol Soc 2009;50(8):1226-1231.

Published online: 7 September 2009

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2009.50.8.1226

Comparison of IOLMaster^Ⓡ and A-Scan Ultrasound: Change in Axial Length After Vitrectomy in Macular Disease

Won Lee Seung, MD¹, Gun Kim Young, MD¹, Jun Lee Seung, MD², Kyun Kim Do, MD³, Woo Kwak Hyung, MD¹, Young Yu Seung, MD¹

¹Department of Ophthalmology, KyungHee University, School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

²Department of Ophthalmology, Kangwon National University, College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Korea

³Department of Ophthalmology, Myugji Hospital, Goyang, Korea

Address reprint requests to Seung Young Yu, MD Department of Ophthalmology, KyungHee University College of Medicine #1 Hoegi-dong, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 130-702, Korea Tel: 82-2-958-8451, Fax: 82-2-966-7340, E-mail: syyu@khu.ac.kr

Received 9 June 200816 June 2009

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose:

To evaluate the differences between IOLMaster^Ⓡ and A-scans in changes in axial length after vitrectomy in patients with macular disease.

Methods:

Using IOLMaster^Ⓡ and A-scans, we measured preoperative and postoperative axial length in 12 eyes with epiretinal membranes (ERM) and in 8 eyes with macular holes (MH). The relationship between the absolute error in axial length after vitrec-tomy and both methods was assessed using Mann-Whitney U test. The correlation to central macular thickness was evaluated by Spearman’ s correlation coefficient.

Results:

In eyes with ERM and MH, preoperative and postoperative axial lengths obtained with both methods had no significant difference (p>0.05). The absolute error in axial length after vitrectomy was not significant using IOLMaster^Ⓡ (ERM: 0.07±0.05 mm, MH: 0.04±0.02 mm, p>0.05) but was significant using A-scan (ERM: 0.20±0.11 mm, MH: 0.30±0.07 mm, p<0.05). The correlation between the change of axial length after vitrectomy and the central macular thickness was poor (IOLMaster^Ⓡ: ERM; correlation coefficient = −0.182, p>0.05, MH; correlation coefficient = −0.054, p>0.05, A-scan: ERM; correlation coefficient = −0.210, p >0.05, MH; correlation coefficient = −0.156, p >0.05).

Conclusions:

The IOLMaster^Ⓡ is more useful than the A-scan when measuring axial length without refractive errors after vitrec-tomy in eyes with macular disease.

Keywords: A-scan, Axial length, Central macular thickness, IOLMaster^Ⓡ, Vitrectomy

References

1. McDonald HR, Verre WP, Aaberg TM. Surgical management of idiopathic epiretinal membranes. Ophthamology. 1986; 93:978–83.

2. Brooks HL Jr. Macular hole surgery with and without internal limiting membrane peeling. Ophthalmology. 2000; 107:1939–48.

3. Holladay JT, Prager TC, Ruiz RS, et al. Improving the predicta-bility of intraocular lens power calculations. Arch Ophthalmol. 1986; 104:539–41.

4. Olsen T. Sources of error in intraocular lens power calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1992; 18:125–9.

5. Kim HJ, Kim HJ, Joo CK. Comparison of IOL Master, A-scan and Orbscan II for measurement of axial length and anterior chamber depth. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2003; 44:1519–27.

6. Tehrani M, Krummenauer F, Blom E, Dick HB. Evaluation of the practicality of optical biometry and applanation ultrasound in 253 eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003; 29:741–6.

7. Song BY, Yang KJ, Yoon KC. Accuracy of partial coherence interferometry in intraocular lens power calculation. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2005; 46:775–80.

8. Hwang JS, Lee JH. Comparison of the IOL master and A-scan ultrasound: refractive results of 96 consecutive cases. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2007; 48:27–32.

9. Drexler W, Findl O, Menapace R, et al. Partial coherence inter-ferometry: a novel approach to biometry in cataract surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998; 126:524–34.

10. Findl O, Drexler W, Menapace R, et al. High precision biometry of pseudophakic eyes using partial coherence interferometry. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1998; 24:1087–93.

11. Haigis W, Lege B, Miller N, Schneider B. Comparison of immersion ultrasound biometry and partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens calculation according to Haigis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2000; 238:765–73.

12. Vogel A, Dick HB, Krummenauer F. Reproducibility of optical biometry using partial coherence interferometry: intraobserver and interobserver reliability. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001; 27:1961–8.

13. Kiss B, Findl O, Menapace R, et al. Biometry of cataractous eyes using partial coherence interferometry: clinical feasibility study of a commercial prototype I. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002; 28:224–9.

14. Tehrani M, Krummenauer F, Kumar R, Dick HB. Comparison of biometric measurements using partial coherence interferometry and applanation ultrasound. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003; 29:747–52.

15. Carpineto P, Ciancaglini M, Di Antonio L, et al. Fundus micro-perimetry patterns of fixation in type 2 diabetic patients with diffuse macular edema. Retina. 2007; 27:21–9.

16. Goebel W, Franke R. Retinal thickness in diabetic retinopathy: comparison of optical coherence tomography, the retinal thickness analyzer, and fundus photography. Retina. 2006; 26:49–57.

17. Lege BA, Haigis W. Laser interference biometry versus ultra-sound biometry in certain clinical conditions. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2004; 242:8–12.

18. Ueda T, Nawa Y, Hara Y. Relationship between the retinal thickness of the macula and the difference in axial length. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2006; 244:498–501.

19. Attas-Fox L, Zadok D, Gerber Y, et al. Axial length measurement in eyes with diabetic macular edema: A-scan ultrasound versus IOLMaster. Ophthalmology. 2007; 114:1499–504.

20. Goebel W, Kretzchmar-Gross T. Retinal thickness in diabetic retinopathy: a study using optical coherence tomography (OCT). Retina. 2002; 22:759–67.

21. Rose LT, Moshegov CN. Comparison of the Zeiss IOLMaster and applanation A-scan ultrasound: biometry for intraocular lens calculation. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2003; 31:121–4.

22. Nemeth J, Fekete O, Pesztenlehrer N. Optical and ultrasound measurement of axial length and anterior chamber depth for intraocular lens power calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003; 29:85–8.

23. Chan A, Duker JS, Ko TH, et al. Normal macular thickness measurements in healthy eyes using Stratus optical coherence tomography. Arch Ophthalmol. 2006; 124:193–8.

Figure 1.

Scatter plot demonstrating the difference in the absolute error in axial length using IOLMaster^Ⓡ and A− scan versus change in central macular thickness using optical coherence tomography after vitrectomy in epiretinal membrane and macular hole eyes (IOLMaster^Ⓡ: Epiretinal Membrane; correlation coefficient=−0.182, p>0.05, Macular Hole; correlation coefficient=−0.054, p>0.05, A-scan: Epiretinal Membrane; correlation coefficient=−0.210, p>0.05, Macular Hole; correlation coefficient=−0.156, p>0.05).

Table 1.

Demographics of patients

	Epiretinal Membrane (n=12)	Macular Hole (n=8)
Age (years)	61±12 (44~75)	61±9 (46~78)
Male/Female	5/7	4/4
Visual acuity (LogMAR)	0.75±0.32	0.82±0.33
Macular thickness (μm)	311.5±50.4	0
Only vitrectomy/Combined vitrectomy and cataract surgery	3/9	2/6

Table 2.

Comparison of IOLMaster^® and A-scan in axial length measurement before and after vitrectomy

	Epiretinal membrane		Macular hole
	Preoperative axial length measurements	Postoperative axial length measurements	Preoperative axial length measurements	Postoperative axial length measurements
IOL Master^Ⓡ	23.11±0.87	23.16±0.88	22.71±0.55	22.71±0.54
A-scan	23.04±0.95	23.18±0.96	23.00±0.60	22.85±0.61
	p>0.05^∗	p>0.05^∗	p>0.05^∗	p>0.05^∗

^∗ Indicates no statistical significance by Mann-Whitney U test.

Table 3.

Comparison of IOLMaster^® and A-scan in change in axial length after vitrectomy

	Absolute error in axial length after vitrectomy
	Epiretinal membrane		Macular hole
IOL Master^Ⓡ	0.07±0.05	p>0.05^∗	0.04±0.02	p>0.05^∗
A-scan	0.20±0.11	p<0.05^∗†	0.30±0.07	p<0.05^∗†

^∗ Mann-Whitney U test between preoperative and postoperative axial length

^† Indicates statistical significance.

TOOLS

Similar articles