Development and Verification of an Adjustment Factor for Determining the Axial Length Using Optical Biometry in Silicone Oil-Filled Eyes

The aim of this prospective clinical study was to establish and verify an adaptation for axial length (AL) measurement in silicone oil (SO)-filled pseudophakic eyes with a Scheimpflug and partial coherence interferometry (PCI)-based biometer. The AL was measured with a Pentacam AXL (OCULUS Optikgeräte GmbH, Wetzler, Germany) and IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). The coefficients of variation (CoV) and the mean systematic difference (95% confidence interval (CI)) between the devices were calculated. After implementing a setting for measuring AL in tamponaded eyes with a Pentacam based on data of 29 eyes, another 12 eyes were examined for verification. The mean AL obtained with the Pentacam was 25.53 ± 1.94 mm (range: 21.70 to 30.76 mm), and with IOLMaster, 24.73 ± 1.97 mm (ranged 20.84 to 29.92 mm), resulting in a mean offset of 0.80 ± 0.08 mm (95% CI: 0.77, 0.83 mm), p < 0.001. The AL values of both devices showed a strong linear correlation (r = 0.999). Verification data confirmed good agreement, with a statistically and clinically non-significant mean difference of 0.02 ± 0.04 (95% CI: −0.01, 0.05) mm, p = 0.134. We implemented a specific adaptation for obtaining reliable AL values in SO-filled eyes with the Pentacam AXL.

Effect of Implantable Collamer Lens on Anterior Segment Measurement and Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Based on IOLMaster 700 and Sirius

Purpose. To investigate the possible effect of an implantable collamer lens (ICL) on ocular biometrics and intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation. Methods. Ocular measurements were taken preoperatively and at the two-month follow-up using IOLMaster 700 and Sirius in 85 eyes (43 patients) who had previously undergone ICL surgery. IOL power was calculated using either IOLMaster 700 (Barrett Universal II formula) or Sirius (ray-tracing). All data were compared using the paired t-test. Results. The difference between preoperative and postoperative anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), and keratometry on the steep axis (K2) measured by IOLMaster 700 was statistically significant (p < 0.001). In 11 of 85 eyes, IOLMaster misjudged the anterior surface of the ICL as that of the lens, leading to an error in ACD and LT. There were no significant differences between preoperative and postoperative axial length (AL) (p = 0.223), white to white (WTW) (p = 0.100), keratometry on flat axis (K1) (p = 0.117), or central corneal thickness (CCT) (p = 0.648), measured using IOLMaster. The difference in IOL power calculated using the Barrett II formula was significant (p = 0.013). Regression analysis showed that AL and K had the greatest influence on IOL calculation (p < 0.001), and ACD and LT had less influence (p = 0.002, p = 0.218, respectively). K1 and K2 were modified to exclude the influence of K2, and modified IOLs showed no difference between pre and postoperation (p = 0.372). Preoperative and postoperative ACD measured using Sirius were significantly different (p < 0.001); however, the IOL power calculated using ray-tracing technology showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). Conclusions. The ocular biometric apparatus may misjudge the anterior surface of the lens, resulting in measurement errors of ACD and LT, which has little effect on the calculation of IOL power when using IOLMaster 700 (Barrett Universal II formula) and Sirius (ray-tracing).

Comparison of Simulated and True Keratometry Measurements Using Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography and Dual Scheimpflug–Placido Imaging

Purpose. To compare simulated and total keratometry and corneal astigmatism values between the IOLMaster 700 and Galilei G4 devices. Methods. A retrospective chart review was conducted for all patients undergoing phacoemulsification by a single surgeon (RTP) from March through September 2020 and who underwent imaging with both the IOLMaster 700 and Galilei G4. Exclusion criteria were prior corneal surgery, keratectatic diseases and inability to obtain a reliable image during image acquisition. Mean, flat, and steep keratometry values as well as astigmatism magnitude were compared. Results. A total of 200 eyes of 100 patients were included. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were moderate or high for all variables. Mean difference ± SD in SimK and TrueK between devices (G4-IOLM) was 0.05 ± 0.318 diopters and −1.1156 ± 0.438 diopters, respectively ( p < 0.05 for both). The IOLM measured steeper TrueK value than the G4. For SimK, there was a statistically significant difference between devices only for mean keratometry (K), whereas for TrueK, there were significant differences in flat K, steep K, and mean K. Astigmatism analysis revealed a difference in mean (±SD) SimK of 0.07 (±0.57) D at 94 degrees and in mean TrueK of 0.04 (±0.85) D at 108 degrees. Conclusion. Though there is overall good correlation between the IOLMaster 700 and Galilei G4 in SimK and astigmatism measurements, there is a significant difference in TrueK measurements, with the IOLM measuring steeper values by about 1.0 diopter as compared to the G4.