Comparison Of The "White-To-White" Biometric Measurement Among Three Ss-Oct Biometers.
Published 2024 - 42nd Congress of the ESCRS
Reference: PO451 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/wkgy-kx31
Authors: Martin Puzo Bayod* 1 , Marta Jiménez-García 2 , Sara Marquina Martín 1 , Jose Manuel Larrosa Poves 3 , Francisco J Castro Alonso 4
1Unidad de Cirugía Faco-Refractiva (UFR),Hospital Provincial Nuestra Señora de Gracia,Zaragoza ,Spain;Instituto de investigación Sanitaria de Aragón (IIS-A),GIMSO,Zaragoza ,Spain;Cirugía,Universidad de Zaragoza,Zaragoza ,Spain, 2Unidad de Cirugía Faco-Refractiva (UFR),Hospital Provincial Nuestra Señora de Gracia,Zaragoza ,Spain;Instituto de investigación Sanitaria de Aragón (IIS-A),GIMSO,Zaragoza ,Spain;Física Aplicada,Universidad de Zaragoza,Zaragoza ,Spain, 3Chief of Ophthalmology Department,Hospital Provincial Nuestra Señora de Gracia,Zaragoza ,Spain;Instituto de investigación Sanitaria de Aragón (IIS-A),GIMSO,Zaragoza ,Spain;Cirugía,Universidad de Zaragoza,Zaragoza ,Spain, 4Unidad de Cirugía Faco-Refractiva (UFR),Hospital Provincial Nuestra Señora de Gracia,Zaragoza ,Spain;Instituto de investigación Sanitaria de Aragón (IIS-A),GIMSO,Zaragoza,Spain;Cirugía,Universidad de Zaragoza,Zaragoza ,Spain
Purpose
To evaluate the agreement of the white-to-white (WTW) measurement among three biometers with Swept Source - OCT (SS-OCT) technology: ARGOS (Alcon), IOL Master 700 (Zeiss), and ANTERION (Heidelberg).
Setting
Faco-refractive Surgery Unit (UFR) of the Provincial Hospital Nuestra Señora de Gracia (Zaragoza, Spain).
Methods
A prospective study was conducted on a population awaiting cataract surgery. An initial exploratory phase compared the three devices using an ANOVA for repeated measures on the WTW value. Subsequently, a subgroup analysis for ANTERION and ARGOS in comparison with IOL Master 700 was performed, using the paired T-test. The Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess agreement between devices.
Results
The initial analysis of the three devices covered 32 independent eyes. Significant differences were found between IOL Master and ARGOS, and between ARGOS and ANTERION (p<0.05), with IOL Master having the highest average WTW measurement (11.99mm) followed by ARGOS (11.96mm) and then ANTERION (11.65mm). No differences were found between IOL Master and ARGOS in this analysis (p=0.94). The subgroup analysis revealed significant differences (p<0.05) between ARGOS and IOL Master (-0.10mm ± 0.25) in a sample of 350 eyes and between ANTERION and IOL Master (-0.34 ± 0.18) in a sample of 341 eyes.
Conclusions
The WTW measurement exhibits high variability among biometric devices and may be a source of confusion in calculating the intraocular lens (IOL). Furthermore, disparities between devices can affect surgical planning in femtosecond-assisted interventions, or other types of surgeries such as the implantation of phakic IOLs.