Submitted:
20 December 2023
Posted:
21 December 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometer
2.2. VEMoS AXL topographer and biometer
2.3. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Intrasession repeatability analysis
3.2. Analysis of the agreement between biometers
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ferguson, T.J.; Bradley Randleman, J. Cataract surgery following refractive surgery: principles to achieve optical success and patient satisfaction. Surv. Ophthalmol. 2023 Aug 26, S0039-6257(23)00113-3. Online ahead of print. [CrossRef]
- Yu, J.; Wen, D.; Zhao, J.; Wang, Y.; Feng, K.; Wan, T.; Savini, G.; McAlinden, C.; Lin, X.; Niu, L.; Chen, S.; Gao, Q.; Ning, R.; Jin, Y.; Zhou, X.; Huang, J. Comprehensive comparisons of ocular biometry: A network-based big data analysis. Eye Vis. (Lond). 2022, 10, 1. [CrossRef]
- Juliane, M.; Anne-Isabel, L.; Myriam, C.; Vasyl, D.; Toam, K.; Linke, S.J. Biometry and intraocular lens power calculation by combined Scheimpflug-Placido Disc versus optical interferometry devices. J. Ophthalmic Vis. Res. 2022, 17, 453-461. [CrossRef]
- Garcia Ardoy, E.; Mateos, N.; Roda, L.; Torrado Sierra, O.; Baptista, A.M.; Serra, P.M. Repeatability and agreement of swept-source optical coherence tomography and partial coherence interferometry biometers in myopes. Clin. Exp. Optom. 2023, 106, 783-792. [CrossRef]
- Kim, K.Y.; Choi, G.S.; Kang, M.S.; Kim, U.S. Comparison study of the axial length measured using the new swept-source optical coherence tomography ANTERION and the partial coherence interferometry IOL Master. PLoS One 2020, 15, e0244590. [CrossRef]
- Haddad, J.S.; Barnwell, E.; Rocha, K.M.; Ambrosio Jr, R.; Waring IV, G.O. Comparison of biometry measurements using standard partial coherence interferometry versus new Scheimpflug tomography with integrated axial length capability. Clin. Ophthalmol. 2020, 14, 353–358. [CrossRef]
- Whang, W.J.; Yoo, Y.S..; Kang, M.J.; Joo, C.K. Predictive accuracy of partial coherence interferometry and swept-source optical coherence tomography for intraocular lens power calculation. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 13732. [CrossRef]
- Bullimore, M.A.; Slade, S.; Yoo, P.; Otani, T. An evaluation of the IOLMaster 700. Eye Contact Lens 2019, 45, 117-123. [CrossRef]
- Buckenham Boyle, A.; Namkung, S.; Shew, W.; Gokul, A.; McGhee, C.N.J.; Ziaei, M. Repeatability and agreement of white-to-white measurements between slit-scanning tomography, infrared biometry, dual rotating Scheimpflug camera/Placido disc tomography, and swept source anterior segment optical coherence tomography PLoS One 2021, 16, e0254832. [CrossRef]
- Panda, A.; Nanda, A.; Sahoo, K. Comparison of ocular biometry and refractive outcome between ANTERION and IOL Master 700. Indian J. Ophthalmol. 2022, 70, 1594-1598. [CrossRef]
- Chang, J.; Wang, L.; Jiang, C.; Song, Z.; Lu, P. Predicting the postoperative intraocular lens position based on IOL Master 700 biometry, compared with results from the anterior segment analysis system. Graefes Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 2023 Jul 21. doi: 10.1007/s00417-023-06175-1. Online ahead of print. [CrossRef]
- Románek, J.; Sluková, K. Comparison of optical biometers Argos and IOL Master 700. Cesk. Slov. Oftalmol. 2021, 77, 295-299. doi: 10.31348/2021/35. [CrossRef]
- Muzyka-Woźniak, M.; Oleszko, A. Comparison of anterior segment parameters and axial length measurements performed on a Scheimpflug device with biometry function and a reference optical biometer. Int. Ophthalmol. 2019, 39, 1115-1122. [CrossRef]
- Hashemi, H.; Miraftab, M.; Panahi, P.; Asgari, S. Biometry and intraocular power calculation using a swept-source optical coherence tomography: A repeatability and agreement study. Indian J. Ophthalmol. 2022, 70, 2845-2850. [CrossRef]
- Monera Lucas, C.E; Escolano Serrano, J.; Tarazona Jaimes, C.; Romero Valero, D.; Moya Martínez, A.; Martínez Toldos, J.J. Repeatability and comparability of a new swept-source optical coherence tomographer in optical biometry. Arch. Soc. Esp. Oftalmol. (Engl. Ed.) 2022, 97, 670-675. [CrossRef]
- Moon, J.Y.; Cho, S.C.; Kim, H.J.; Jun, R.M.; Han, K.E. Agreement between two swept-source optical coherence tomography biometers and a partial coherence interferometer. Korean J. Ophthalmol. 2022, 36, 326-337. [CrossRef]
- Cheng, S.M.; Zhang, J.S.; Shao, X.; Wu, Z.T.; Li T.T.; Wang, P.; Lin, J.H.; Yu, A.Y. Repeatability of a new swept-source optical coherence tomographer and agreement with other three optical biometers. Graefes Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 2022, 260, 2271-2281. [CrossRef]
- Fişuş, A.D.; Hirnschall, N.D.; Ruiss, M.; Pilwachs, C.; Georgiev, S.; Findl, O. Repeatability of 2 swept-source OCT biometers and 1 optical low-coherence reflectometry biometer. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 2021, 47, 1302-1307. [CrossRef]
- Olsen, T. Calculation of intraocular lens power: a review. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 2007, 85, 472-485. [CrossRef]
- Tañá-Sanz, P.; Ruiz-Santos, M.; Rodríguez-Carrillo, M.D.; Aguilar-Córcoles, S.; Montés-Micó, R.; Tañá-Rivero, P. Agreement between intraoperative anterior segment spectral-domain OCT and 2 swept-source OCT biometers. Expert. Rev. Med. Devices 2021, 18, 387-393. [CrossRef]
- Díez-Ajenjo, M.A.; Luque-Cobija, M.J.; Peris-Martínez, C.; Ortí-Navarro, S.; García-Domene, M.C. Refractive changes and visual quality in patients with corneal edema after cataract surgery. BMC Ophthalmol. 2022, 22, 242. [CrossRef]

| Mean | SD | Minimum | Maximum | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AL (mm) | 23.83 | 1.01 | 21.49 | 26.88 |
| SW of AL (mm) | 0.004 | 0.006 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| CCT (µm) | 545.86 | 30.92 | 473.70 | 626.73 |
| SW of CCT (µm) | 4.394 | 1.531 | 0.000 | 7.140 |
| ACD (mm) | 3.695 | 0.279 | 3.090 | 4.360 |
| SW of ACD (mm) | 0.017 | 0.027 | 0.000 | 0.250 |
| Mean | SD | Minimum | Maximum | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AL (mm) | -0.01 | 0.02 | -0.07 | 0.07 |
| CCT (µm) | 5.01 | 4.73 | -8.48 | 14.65 |
| ACD (mm) | 0.12 | 0.05 | -0.02 | 0.24 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).