저간섭성 반사계와 기존 장비 간의 안구생체계측 및 백내장 수술 후 굴절오차의 비교

Abstract

Purpose : To compare axial length (AL) and keratometry (K) using optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR, Lenstar LS900®, Haag-Streit, Bern, Switzerland) with current ocular biometry devices and evaluate the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation.

Methods : In this prospective, comparative observational study of eyes with cataracts, AL and K were measured using an OLCR device (Lenstar LS900®, Haag-Streit), partial coherence interferometry (PCI, IOL Master®, Carl Zeiss, Jena, Germany), A-scan (Eyecubed) and automated keratometry (KR-7100, Topcon, Tokyo, Japan). IOL power calculation was performed using the Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff (SRK/T) formula. The IOL prediction error (PE) was calculated by subtracting the predicted IOL power from the postoperative (PO) IOL power (PO 4 weeks, PO 12 weeks).

Results : A total of 50 eyes of 39 patients with cataracts (mean age 67.12 ± 8.51 years) were evaluated in this study. AL and K were not significantly different between the OLCR device and other devices (analysis of variance [ANOVA], p = 0.946, 0.062, respectively). The mean PE in IOL power calculation was -0.22 ± 0.50D with the OLCR device, 0.08 ± 0.45D with the PCI device and -0.01 ± 0.48D with A-scan and automated keratometry (ANOVA, p = 0.006). The highest percentage of eyes with PE smaller than ± 0.5D was IOL Master® followed by Eyecubed and then Lenstar LS900®. The mean absolute PE was not statistically significant among the 3 devices (ANOVA, p = 0.684).

Conclusions : Ocular biometry measurements were comparable between the OLCR device and the PCI ultrasound device. However, the IOL power prediction showed significant differences among the 3 devices. Therefore, the differences in application of these devices should be considered.