Copenhagen 2016 Registration Programme Exhibitor Information Virtual Exhibition Satellite Meetings Glaucoma Day 2016 Hotel Star Alliance
title

10 - 14 Sept. 2016, Bella Center, Copenhagen, Denmark

This Meeting has been awarded 27 CME credits

 

escrs app advert yo advert

Posters

Search Title by author or title

Comparability of biological measurements using different non-contact measurement technologies in myopes

Poster Details

First Author: Q. Zhao CHINA

Co Author(s):    R. Cui   Y. Song   W. Yang   F. Zhang   D. Li   Z. Wang     

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To determine the comparability of biological measurements obtained by three non-contact devices in myopes.

Setting:

Department of Ophthalmology, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, China.

Methods:

In this prospective study, 106 eyes in 53 myopes were examined by the IOLMaster 500, Lenstar LS900 and Pentacam HR. All the measurements were obtained by one experienced operator. We analyzed the agreement of keratometry readings of flattest and steepest meridian (K1 and K2), corneal astigmatism (diopter@ meridian), anterior chamber depth (distance from corneal epithelium to lens surface; ACD), pupil diameter (PD) and horizontal cornea width (white-to-white distance; WTW), obtained by IOL Master, Lenstar and Pentacam. Besides, we compared central corneal thickness (CCT) obtained by the Lenstar and Pentacam, and axial length (AL) obtained by the IOLMaster and Lenstar.

Results:

There was no statistically significant difference among keratometry (K1, K2), corneal astigmatism and ACD obtained by the above devices, and neither was AL obtained by the IOL Master and Lenstar. But there was statistically significant difference between CCT obtained by the Lenstar and Pentacam. Although there was no statistically significant difference between PD and WTW obtained by IOLMaster and Lenstar, the differences were significant when compared with those obtained by Pentacam, respectively. Relatively poor agreement for CCT was obtained between the LenStar and Pentacam, and also for PD and WTW between the IOLMaster and LenStar, and between IOLMaster and Pentacam. Relatively good agreement for other measures were observed among the IOLMaster, LenStar and Pentacam, respectively.

Conclusions:

For the convenience of clinical practice, the keratometry (K1, K2), corneal astigmatism and ACD obtained by the IOLMaster, Lenstar and Pentacam could be used interchangeably, so could the AL obtained by IOLMaster and Lenstar . But the exchange of CCT obtained by Lenstar and Pentacam is not qualified. Besides, PD or WTW obtained by IOLMaster and Lenstar could not be exchanged with those obtained by Pentacam, respectively.

Financial Disclosure:

NONE

Back to Poster listing