Is Partial Coherence Interferometry More Accurate Than a Scan Ultrasonography in the Estimation of Anterior Chamber Depth ?

2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 2553-2555
Author(s):  
Doaa A. Mahmoud
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Chamber ◽  
Anterior Chamber Depth ◽  
Partial Coherence ◽  
Partial Coherence Interferometry

scholarly journals Comparison of Anterior Segment Measurements with Scheimpflug/Placido Photography-Based Topography System and IOLMaster Partial Coherence Interferometry in Patients with Cataracts

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinhai Huang ◽  
Na Liao ◽  
Giacomo Savini ◽  
Fangjun Bao ◽  
Ye Yu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prospective Study ◽  
Anterior Chamber ◽  
Anterior Segment ◽  
Anterior Chamber Depth ◽  
Corneal Astigmatism ◽  
Partial Coherence ◽  
Poor Agreement ◽  
Limits Of Agreement ◽  
Partial Coherence Interferometry ◽  
Good Agreement

Purpose. To assess the consistency of anterior segment measurements obtained using a Sirius Scheimpflug/Placido photography-based topography system (CSO, Italy) and IOLMaster partial coherence interferometry (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany) in eyes with cataracts.Methods. A total of 90 eyes of 90 patients were included in this prospective study. The anterior chamber depth (ACD), keratometry (K), corneal astigmatism axis, and white to white (WTW) values were randomly measured three times with Sirius and IOLMaster. Concordance between them was assessed by calculating 95% limits of agreement (LoA).Results. The ACD and K taken with the Sirius were statistically significantly higher than that taken with the IOLMaster; however, the Sirius significantly underestimated the WTW values compared with the IOLMaster. Good agreement was found for Km and ACD measurements, with 95% LoA of −0.20 to 0.54 mm and −0.16 to 0.34 mm, respectively. Poor agreement was observed for astigmatism axis and WTW measurements, as the 95% LoA was −23.96 to 23.36° and −1.15 to 0.37 mm, respectively.Conclusion. With the exception of astigmatism axis and WTW, anterior segment measurements taken by Sirius and IOLMaster devices showed good agreement and may be used interchangeably in patients with cataracts.

scholarly journals Comparative analysis of two optical biometry devices: high wavelength swept source OCT versus partial coherence interferometry

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eszter Szalai ◽  
Adrienne Csutak
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Chamber Depth ◽  
Partial Coherence ◽  
Anterior Surface ◽  
Swept Source ◽  
Partial Coherence Interferometry ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Swept Source Oct ◽  
Iol Power ◽  
The Difference ◽  
High Wavelength

Abstract Purpose To study the reproducibility of measurements performed with a recently developed multimodal high resolution swept source optical coherence tomography (SSOCT) and to make comparisons with a partial coherence interferometry (PCI) biometer. Methods One hundred and fifty-two eyes of 152 subjects were involved in this study with a mean age of 65.71 ± 13.86 years (26–85 years). Anterior surface keratometry (K), anterior chamber depth (ACD), white-to-white (WTW) and axial length (AL) values were recorded by the SSOCT (ANTERION, Heidelberg Engineering Ltd, Germany) and PCI (IOLMaster 500, version 5.5, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany). Intraocular lens (IOL) power was calculated based on ANTERION and IOLMaster keratometry values by using five traditional vergence formulas. Results Anterior surface simulated keratometry values did not differ significantly between the IOLMaster and ANTERION (P > 0.05). AL measurements were successful in 95% of the cases both with the SSOCT and PCI. No significant difference was disclosed between the two instruments (P = 0.229). For WTW measurements, a significant difference was observed between the two optical biometers (P < 0.0001). The difference between PCI and SSOCT in IOL powers was statistically significant for SRK/T, Hoffer and Holladay formulas (P < 0.001). Conclusion Our results implicated an overall good reproducibility of anterior keratometry, AL, ACD and WTW measurements for IOLMaster and ANTERION. The discrepancies between their measurements resulted in significant difference in the calculated IOL power for SRK/T, Hoffer and Holladay formulas, but not for Haigis formula.

scholarly journals Comparison of Two Novel Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Devices to A Partial Coherence Interferometry-Based Biometer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tommy Chan ◽  
Marco Yu ◽  
Vivian Chiu ◽  
Gilda Lai ◽  
Christopher Leung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Optical Coherence Tomography ◽  
Anterior Chamber Depth ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Systematic Difference ◽  
Partial Coherence ◽  
Optical Coherence ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Swept Source ◽  
Partial Coherence Interferometry ◽  
Significant Disagreement

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the repeatability and agreement of cornea and biometry measurements obtained with two swept-source optical coherence tomography (SSOCT) and a partial coherence interferometry-based device.METHODS This is a cross-sectional study. Forty-eight eyes of 48 patients had three consecutive measurements for ANTERION (Heidelberg Engineering, Germany), CASIAII (Tomey, Japan) and IOLMaster500 (Carl Zeiss Meditec, USA) on the same visit. Mean keratometry (Km), central cornea thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD) and axial length (AL) were recorded. Corneal astigmatic measurements were converted into vector components – J0 and J45. Intra-device repeatability and agreements of measurements amongst the devices were evaluated using repeatability coefficients (RCs) and Bland-Altman plots, respectively. RESULTS All devices demonstrated comparable repeatability for Km (p≥0.138). ANTERION had the lowest RC for J0 amongst the devices (p≤0.039). Systematic difference was found for the Km and J0 obtained with IOLMaster500 compared to either SSOCTs (p≤0.010). The ACD and AL measured by IOLMaster500 showed a higher RC compared with either SSOCTs (p<0.002). Systematic difference was found in CCT and ACD between the two SSOCTs (p<0.001), and in AL between ANTERION and IOLMaster500 (p<0.001), with a mean difference of 1.6 µm, 0.022mm and 0.021 mm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Both SSOCTs demonstrated smaller test-retest variability for measuring ACD and AL compared with IOLMaster500. There were significant disagreement in keratometry and AL measurements between the SSOCTs and PCI-based device; their measurements should not be considered as interchangeable but the disagreement could be refined by readjustment of intraocular lens constant in clinical practice.

Comparison of 13 formulas for IOL power calculation with measurements from partial coherence interferometry

2020 ◽  
pp. bjophthalmol-2020-316193
Author(s):  
Giacomo Savini ◽  
Marco Di Maita ◽  
Kenneth J Hoffer ◽  
Kristian Næser ◽  
Domenico Schiano-Lomoriello ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Chamber Depth ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Absolute Error ◽  
Partial Coherence ◽  
Power Calculation ◽  
Partial Coherence Interferometry ◽  
Iol Power Calculation ◽  
Iol Power ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Difference

Background/aimsTo compare the accuracy of 13 formulas for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in cataract surgery.MethodsIn this retrospective interventional case series, optical biometry measurements were entered into these formulas: Barrett Universal II (BUII) with and without anterior chamber depth (ACD) as a predictor, EVO 2.0 with and without ACD as a predictor, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Holladay 2AL, Kane, Næser 2, Pearl-DGS, RBF 2.0, SRK/T, T2 and VRF. The mean prediction error (PE), median absolute error (MedAE), mean absolute error and percentage of eyes with a PE within ±0.25, ±0.50, ±0.75 and ±1.00 diopters (D) were calculated.ResultsTwo hundred consecutive eyes were enrolled. With all formulas, the mean PE was zero. The BUII with no ACD had the lowest standard deviation (±0.343 D), followed by the T2 (0.347 D), Kane (0.348 D), EVO 2.0 with no ACD (0.348 D) and BUII with ACD (0.353 D) formulas. The difference among the MedAEs of all formulas was statistically significant (p<0.0001); the lowest values were achieved with the Kane (0.214 D), RBF 2.0 (0.215 D), BUII with and without ACD (0.218 D) and SRK/T (0.223 D). A percentage ranging from 80% to 88.5% of eyes showed a PE within ±0.50 D and all formulas achieved more than 50% of eyes with a PE within ±0.25 D.ConclusionAll investigated formulas achieved good results; there was a tendency towards better outcomes with newer formulas. Traditional formulas can still be considered an accurate option.

scholarly journals Comparison of two novel swept-source optical coherence tomography devices to a partial coherence interferometry-based biometer

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tommy C. Y. Chan ◽  
Marco C. Y. Yu ◽  
Vivian Chiu ◽  
Gilda Lai ◽  
Christopher K. S. Leung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Optical Coherence Tomography ◽  
Corneal Thickness ◽  
Anterior Chamber Depth ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Systematic Difference ◽  
Partial Coherence ◽  
Optical Coherence ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Swept Source ◽  
Partial Coherence Interferometry

AbstractTo evaluate the repeatability and agreement of corneal and biometry measurements obtained with two swept-source optical coherence tomography (SSOCT) and a partial coherence interferometry-based device. This is a cross-sectional study. Forty-eight eyes of 48 patients had three consecutive measurements for ANTERION (Heidelberg Engineering, Germany), CASIAII (Tomey, Japan) and IOLMaster500 (Carl Zeiss Meditec, USA) on the same visit. Mean keratometry (Km), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD) and axial length (AL) were recorded. Corneal astigmatic measurements were converted into vector components—J0 and J45. Intra-device repeatability and agreements of measurements amongst the devices were evaluated using repeatability coefficients (RCs) and Bland–Altman plots, respectively. All devices demonstrated comparable repeatability for Km (p ≥ 0.138). ANTERION had the lowest RC for J0 amongst the devices (p ≤ 0.039). Systematic difference was found for the Km and J0 obtained with IOLMaster500 compared to either SSOCTs (p ≤ 0.010). The ACD and AL measured by IOLMaster500 showed a higher RC compared with either SSOCTs (p < 0.002). Systematic difference was found in CCT and ACD between the two SSOCTs (p < 0.001), and in AL between ANTERION and IOLMaster500 (p < 0.001), with a mean difference of 1.6 µm, 0.022 mm and 0.021 mm, respectively. Both SSOCTs demonstrated smaller test–retest variability for measuring ACD and AL compared with IOLMaster500. There were significant disagreement in keratometry and AL measurements between the SSOCTs and PCI-based device; their measurements should not be considered as interchangeable.

Management of Anterior Chamber Depth After Trabeculectomy

1988 ◽  
Vol 106 (6) ◽  
pp. 767-768 ◽  
Author(s):  
RICHARD J. MACKOOL ◽  
JORGE N. BUXTON
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Chamber ◽  
Anterior Chamber Depth
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document