Lisbon 2017 Delegate Registration Programme Exhibition Virtual Exhibition Satellites OneWorld Travel Discount
escrs app advert

Posters

Search Title by author or title

Partial coherence laser interferometry and immersion ultrasonography in IOL optic power calculation in myopia patients

Poster Details

First Author: A.Tsygankov RUSSIA

Co Author(s):    K. Pershin   N. Pashinova   S. Legkih   Z. Afaunova           

Abstract Details

Purpose:

Evaluation of axial length and anterior chamber depth measurements accuracy with optical coherence biometry and immersion ultrasound, their impact on IOL calculation accuracy in patients with myopia.

Setting:

Eximer Eye Center, Moscow, Russian Federation

Methods:

An open prospective study included 34 patients (64 eyes) with myopia of varying degrees (the average AL 25.75 �Â�± 1.74 mm according to the immersion scanning and 25.85 �Â�± 1.76 mm over the PCI data) who underwent cataract phacoemulsification (n=42; 65.6%) or lensectomy (n=22; 34.4%) with IOL implantation. Group I includes cases with AL 24.1-25.9 mm (n=34) and group II - AL 26.0-30.6 mm (n = 30).

Results:

In Group I's AL mean value, determined by A-scan (24.98�Â�±1.15 mm) was not significantly different from that according to IOL-Master (25.02�Â�±1.20 mm). In the group with the axial length more than 26 mm mean value according to the A-scan (27.97�Â�±2.14 mm) was significantly lower than that of the IOL-Master (28.16�Â�±2.15 mm; p=0.042). No differences were observed when measuring the anterior chamber depth. Prediction error for the three planned refraction ranges (�Â�±0.5 �Â�±1.0 and �Â�± 1.5 diopters) was not significantly different between the groups (p>0,1).

Conclusions:

Ultrasound A-scan and optical biometry remain methods of choice for measuring the axial length and anterior chamber depth before cataract phacoemulsification. IOL-Master is characterized by high reproducibility and accuracy of AL measurements, despite comparable efficacy with A-scan in patients with myopia. Present study shows a greater precision of optical biometry with IOL optic power calculating formulas Barrett and Haigis compared with Hoffer-Q and Holladay II, but the differences were not statistically significant.

Financial Disclosure:

NONE

Back to Poster listing