COMPARISON OF BIOMETRIC PARAMETERS USING SWEPT-SOURCE OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY – ARGOS AND IOL MASTER 700
Published 2022 - 26th ESCRS Winter Meeting
Reference: P092 | Type: Abstracts | DOI: 10.82333/21gn-ha63
Authors: João Leite* 1 , João Heitor Marques 1 , Ana Carolina Abreu 1 , Silvia Monteiro 1 , Maria Céu Pinto 1
1Ophthalmology,Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,Porto,Portugal
Purpose
Compare the biometric parameters obtained by two scanning source optical coherence tomography biometers (SS-OCT) - Argos® and IOL Master® 700.
Setting
Ophthalmology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Portugal.
Methods
This cross-sectional, observational and device comparison study analyzed corneal curvature (K), axial length (AL), depth of the anterior chamber (ACD), white to white (WTW) and lens thickness (LT) obtained by two biometers - Argos® and IOL Master® 700. Also, the dioptric intraocular lens (IOL) power proposed (for the Clareon® IOL model using the Barrett Universal II formula) by the two devices was evaluated. A paired t-test (p) was used to compare the parameters acquired with the two biometers; Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) was used to assess the correlation between devices. A p value < 0.05 indicates statistical significance; an r value between 0.5-1 corresponds to a high level of correlation.
Results
A total of 315 eyes of 158 patients were successfully examined by both devices. Comparing Argos® with IOL Master® 700, the mean (SD) K was 44.13 ± 1.61 vs 44.08 ± 1.62 (p<0.001; r=0.995, p<0.01); AL was 24.23 ± 2.02 mm vs 24.39 ± 2.47 mm (p=0.155; r=0.863, p<0.01); ACD was 3.38 ± 0.44 vs 3.30 ± 0.45 (p<0.001; r=0.954, p<0.01); LT was 4.50 ± 0.53 vs 4.37 ± 0.58 (p<0.001; r=0.926, p<0.01); WTW was 11.91 ± 0.56 vs 11.93 ± 0.61 (p=0.529; r=0.462, p<0.01). In relation to the dioptric power proposed by the device, on average (SD), this power was higher in the IOL master (19.32 ± 4.68 vs 19.08 ± 5.12) (p<0.001; r=0.997, p<0.01).
Conclusion
Except for AL and WTW, there were statistically significant differences in the biometric parameters measured by the two biometers. However, a strong correlation between devices were found (except for the WTW). Comparing the two instruments, Argos® presents higher values in the analyzed variables, with the exception of AL and WTW. Concerning IOP power calculation, the statistical differences found may not be clinically significant.