Level of agreement of intraocular lens power measurements between an image-guided system and partial coherence interferometry. Issue 4 (April 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Labiris, Georgios; Panagiotopoulou, Eirini-Kanella; Ntonti, Panagiota; Gkika, Maria; Konstantinidis, Aristeidis; Perente, Irfan; Dardabounis, Doukas; Ioannakis, Konstantinos
• Is Part Of: Journal of cataract and refractive surgery. Volume 46:Issue 4(2020)
• Page Start: 573
• Page End: 580
• Publication Date: 2020-04
• Subjects: 617.7
• DOI: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000085
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0886-3350

Abstract

Abstract : Verion calculates lower IOL power compared to IOLMaster. Inserting keratometric data from IOLMaster to Verion and using the latter as a digital marker provides excellent refractive outcomes in toric corrections. Abstract : Purpose: To evaluate the level of agreement of partial coherence interferometry (IOLMaster) and an image-guided system (Verion) in terms of keratometric values and intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation. Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital of Alexandroupolis, Greece. Design: Prospective comparative study. Methods: Keratometric (K) values and IOL power calculations were compared for 3 toric IOL models (SN6ATx, TFNTx0, and SV25Tx) using 4 formulas (SRK/T, Holladay 1, Hoffer Q, and Haigis) in patients who had cataract surgery in a consecutive-if-eligible way. Results: Ninety-eight eyes from 54 patients were included in the study (mean age: 60.2 ± 9.2 years). Compared with the IOLMaster, the Verion measured significantly steeper K1, K2, and Km values ( P < .05), but no significant difference was observed in astigmatism power and vectors J0 and J45 ( P > .05). With the SRK/T formula, the SN6ATx IOL showed significant difference in the mean IOL power calculated by the 2 devices, whereas no significant difference was observed in the TFNTx0 IOL and the SV25Tx IOL. However, with the Holladay 1, Hoffer Q, and Haigis formulas, a significant difference was found in the mean IOL power of all 3 toric IOL models. Generally, the Verion calculated a significantly lower mean IOL power for almost all formulas and IOL models. For 35 toric implantations, the mean residual astigmatism power, 6 months postoperatively, was 0.29 ± 0.24 diopter. Conclusions: The IOLMaster and the Verion seemed to present differences in IOL calculation and surgical planning that could lead to unexpected residual refractive error. When discrepancy is detected in IOL calculation, using the IOLMaster as the primary biometry and the Verion as a digital marker alone could provide excellent outcomes in terms of astigmatism correction.