ESCRS - PP23.15 - Level Of Agreement Of Intraocular Lens Power Measurements Between A Swept-Source Oct Biometer And A Partial Coherence Interferometer.

Level Of Agreement Of Intraocular Lens Power Measurements Between A Swept-Source Oct Biometer And A Partial Coherence Interferometer.

Published 2025 - 43rd Congress of the ESCRS

Reference: PP23.15 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/kzk4-0323

Authors: Martin Dirisamer* 1 , Jack Parker 2 , David Lockington 3 , Gerrit Melles 4

1University Eyehospital Munich,Munich,Germany, 2Parker Cornea,Birmingham,United States, 3Tennent Institute of Ophthalmology,Glasgow,United Kingdom, 4Netherlands Institute for Innovative Ocular Surgery,Rotterdam,Netherlands

Purpose

To evaluate the level of agreement of a swept-source optical coherence tomography biometer (Argos) and partial coherence interferometry (IOLMaster 500) in terms of biometry values, intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation, and mean prediction error.

Setting

Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital of Alexandroupolis, Greece.

Methods

Axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD), flat (K1), steep (K2), and mean (Km) keratometry values, along with astigmatism power, J0 and J45 vector components, white-to-white distance (WTW), and IOL power calculations for nine IOL models using four formulas, were compared in cataract patients. Refractive outcomes for eyes implanted with SN60WF and Panoptix IOLs were assessed three months postoperatively. The mean prediction error (mean error-ME) was calculated for each model and formula for these two IOLs.

Results

This study included 133 eyes (mean age: 66.0 ± 10.95 years). The Argos system measured significantly higher ACD and steeper K1, K2, and Km values compared to the IOLMaster, while no significant differences were found in AL, astigmatism power, WTW, or J0 and J45 vectors. All mean differences in IOL power calculations across IOL models were below the clinically significant threshold of 0.50 D, except for SN6ATx with Hoffer Q and Haigis, and Clareon with Haigis. For Panoptix and SN60WF, IOLMaster showed a more hyperopic ME than Argos with SRK/T, Holladay 1, and Hoffer Q, but without clinically significant differences.

Conclusions

Argos and IOLMaster 500 showed differences in ACD, keratometry values, and IOL power calculations. However, for most formulas, the differences in IOL power calculation and ME between the two devices were not clinically significant.