Journal List > J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > v.56(4) > 1010239

Lee, Park, Seong, Cho, and Kang: Comparison of Ocular Biometry and Postoperative Refraction in Cataract Patients between Galilei-G6® and IOL Master®

초록

Purpose:

To compare the axial lengths, anterior chamber depths, and keratometric measurements and to predict postoperative refractions of Dual Scheimpflug analyzer Galilei G6® and intra ocular lens (IOL) Master®.

Methods:

A total of 50 eyes in 50 patients who received cataract surgery were included in the present study. The axial length, anterior chamber depth, and keratometry were measured using 2 types of partial coherence interferometries (Galilei G6® and IOL Master®). The SRK/T formula was used to calculate IOL power and the predictive error which subtracts predictive refraction from postoperative refraction was compared between the ocular biometry devices.

Results:

Axial lengths were 23.36 ± 0.80 mm and 23.36 ± 0.90 mm measured by Galilei G6® and IOL Master®, respectively. Axial length measured by Galilei G6® was not statistically significant compared with IOL Master® ( p = 0.321). The anterior chamber depth and keratometry were 3.22 ± 0.35 mm and 44.29 ± 1.40 D measured by Galilei G6® and 3.11 ± 0.46 mm and 44.39 ± 1.41 D measured by IOL Master®, respectively. The differences of anterior chamber depth and keratometry between the 2 devices were statistically significant ( p < 0.001 and p = 0.028, respectively). The mean absolute prediction errors were 0.45 ± 0.37 D and 0.49 ± 0.39 D in Galilei G6® and IOL Master®, respectively and was not statistically significantly different ( p = 0.423).

Conclusions:

The ocular biometric measurements and prediction of postoperative refraction using Galilei G6® were as accurate as with IOL Master®.

References

1. Olsen T. Sources of error in intraocular lens power calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1992; 18:125–9.
crossref
2. Gimbel HV, Sun R. Accuracy and predictability of intraocular lens power calculation after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001; 27:571–6.
crossref
3. Holzer MP, Mamusa M, Auffarth GU. Accuracy of a new partial coherence interferometry analyser for biometric measurements. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009; 93:807–10.
crossref
4. Hwang JS, Lee JH. Comparison of the IOL Master(R) and A-scan ultrasound: refractive results of 96 consecutive cases. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2007; 48:27–32.
5. Lam AK, Chan R, Pang PC. The repeatability and accuracy of axial length and anterior chamber depth measurements from the IOLMaster. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2001; 21:477–83.
6. Choi JH, Roh GH. The reproducibility and accuracy of biometry parameter measurement from IOL Master (R). J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2004; 45:1665–73.
7. Olsen T, Thorwest M. Calibration of axial length measurements with the Zeiss IOLMaster. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005; 31:1345–50.
crossref
8. Shin JA, Chung SK. Comparison of the refractive results measured by ultrasound and partial coherence interferometers. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2013; 54:723–7.
crossref
9. Patel RP, Pandit RT. Comparison of Anterior Chamber Depth Measurements from the Galilei Dual Scheimpflug Analyzer with IOLMaster. J Ophthalmol. 2012; 2012:430249.
crossref
10. Lopez de la Fuente C, Sanchez-Cano A, Segura F, Pinilla I. Comparison of anterior segment measurements obtained by three different devices in healthy eyes. Biomed Res Int. 2014; 2014:498080.
crossref
11. Santodomingo-Rubido J, Mallen EA, Gilmartin B, Wolffsohn JS. A new non-contact optical device for ocular biometry. Br J Ophthalmol. 2002; 86:458–62.
crossref
12. Kim SI, Kang SJ, Oh TH, et al. Accuracy of ocular biometry and postoperative refraction in cataract patients with AL-Scan(R). J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2013; 54:1688–93.
13. Shin JW, Seong MC, Kang MH, et al. Comparison of ocular biometry and postoperative refraction in cataract patients between Lenstar® and IOL Master®. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2012; 53:833–8.
14. Buckhurst PJ, Wolffsohn JS, Shah S, et al. A new optical low coherence reflectometry device for ocular biometry in cataract patients. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009; 93:949–53.
crossref

Figure 1.
Bland-Altman plot of axial length between Galilei G6® and IOL master® (95% limits of agreement for axial length difference Galilei G6®-IOL master® [-0.101, 0.087]. IOL = intra ocular lens.
jkos-56-515f1.tif
Figure 2.
Bland-Altman plot of anterior chamber depth between Galilei G6® and IOL master® (95% limits of agreement for axial length difference: Galilei G6®-IOL master® [-0.22, 0.44]). IOL = intra ocular lens.
jkos-56-515f2.tif
Figure 3.
Bland-Altman plot of keratometry between Galilei G6® and IOL master® (A), and auto refractive keratometry (ARK) (B) (95% limits of agreement for axial length difference: Galilei G6®-IOL master® [-0.69, 0.49]; Galilei G6®-ARK [-0.54, 0.44]). IOL = intra ocular lens.
jkos-56-515f3.tif
Table 1.
Demographics and biometry measurements by Galilei G6®, IOL master®
  Galilei G6® IOL master® p-value*
Age (years) 69.2 ± 9.07 (51-92) - -
Sex (M/F) 50 (20/30) - -
Cataract   - -
  Nuclear opacity 3.6 ± 0.2    
  Cortical opacity 1.8 ± 0.1    
  Posterior subcapsular 0.6 ± 0.1    
AL (mm) 23.36 ± 0.80 (21.77-26.39) 23.36 ± 0.90 (21.71-26.52) 0.321
ACD (mm) 3.22 ± 0.35 (2.72-3.92) 3.11 ± 0.46 (2.21-3.97) 0.000
K (diopter) 44.29 ± 1.40 (41.29-47.10) 44.39 ± 1.41 (41.54-47.62) 0.028

Values are presented as mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated.

IOL = intra ocular lens; AL = axial length; ACD = anterior chamber depth; K = keratometry.

* Paired t-test;

Cataract stage by Lens Opacities Classification System III (LOCS III).

Table 2.
Comparison of absolute prediction error among Galilei G6®, IOL master®
  Prediction error (diopter)
Number of eyes within (%)
  PE Absolute PE Range 0.5 D 1.0 D 1.5 D
Galilei G6® -0.14 ± 0.58 0.45 ± 0.37 -1.48~1.33 31 (62) 15 (92) 4 (100)
IOL master® -0.18 ± 0.60 0.49 ± 0.39 -1.42~0.92 29 (58) 16 (90) 5 (100)

Values are presented as mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated.

PE = prediction error; D = diopter; IOL = intra ocular lens.

TOOLS
Similar articles