Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Ophthalmology 2/2017

01-04-2017 | Original Paper

Comparison of keratometric measurements obtained by the Verion Image Guided System with optical biometry and auto-keratorefractometer

Authors: Leyla Asena, Sirel Gür Güngör, Ahmet Akman

Published in: International Ophthalmology | Issue 2/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the keratometric measurements of Verion Image Guided System with an optical biometer (Zeiss IOLMaster 500, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany) and an automated keratorefractometer (AKR) (Topcon KR-8900, Topcon, Japan). In this prospective clinical trial, the right eyes of 52 patients with cataract were examined (mean age 62.25 ± 12.16 years). The measurements were taken by the three systems in a random order. Keratometric data, magnitude of astigmatism, and astigmatic axis measurements from all three instruments were compared. The results were evaluated using, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), Bland–Altman plots, and paired samples t tests. The mean flat/steep K of Verion, IOLMaster, and AKR were 43.22 ± 1.38D/44.23 ± 1.46D, 43.07 ± 1.26D/44.05 ± 1.34D, and 43.07 ± 1.31D/43.89 ± 1.42D, respectively. Flat K readings of Verion were higher than IOLMaster and AKR (p < 0.05 for both). Steep K readings were different for all three (p < 0.05). The magnitude of astigmatism by Verion and IOLMaster were 0.98 ± 0.65D and 0.98 ± 0.59D (p = 0.88). The mean astigmatism measured by the AKR was 0.82 ± 0.62D, less than the other two instruments (p < 0.001). Astigmatic axis measurements of Verion and AKR differed <10° in 38, between 10° and 20° in 5, and >20° in 9 eyes; the same difference was 30, 11, and 11 eyes, respectively, between Verion and IOLMaster. Although, keratometric and astigmatic results obtained from Verion were not completely interchangeable with IOLMaster and AKR, especially the agreement between Verion and IOLMaster was excellent with ICCs close to one. However, there were pronounced astigmatic axis measurement differences between three instruments.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Chen Y-A, Hirnschall N, Findl O (2011) Evaluation of 2 new optical biometry devices and comparison with the current gold standard biometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 37:513–517CrossRefPubMed Chen Y-A, Hirnschall N, Findl O (2011) Evaluation of 2 new optical biometry devices and comparison with the current gold standard biometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 37:513–517CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Elbaz U, Barkana Y, Gerber Y, Avni I, Zadok D (2007) Comparison of different techniques of anterior chamber depth and keratometric measurements. Am J Ophthalmol 143:48–53CrossRefPubMed Elbaz U, Barkana Y, Gerber Y, Avni I, Zadok D (2007) Comparison of different techniques of anterior chamber depth and keratometric measurements. Am J Ophthalmol 143:48–53CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Symes RJ, Ursell PG (2011) Automated keratometry in routine cataract surgery: comparison of Scheimpflug and conventional values. J Cataract Refract Surg 37:295–301CrossRefPubMed Symes RJ, Ursell PG (2011) Automated keratometry in routine cataract surgery: comparison of Scheimpflug and conventional values. J Cataract Refract Surg 37:295–301CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Nemeth G, Szalai E, Hassan Z, Lipecz A, Berta A, Modis L Jr (2015) Repeatability data and agreement of keratometry with the VERION system compared to the IOLMaster. J Refract Surg 31(5):333–337CrossRefPubMed Nemeth G, Szalai E, Hassan Z, Lipecz A, Berta A, Modis L Jr (2015) Repeatability data and agreement of keratometry with the VERION system compared to the IOLMaster. J Refract Surg 31(5):333–337CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310CrossRefPubMed Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Chen YA, Hirnschall N, Findl O (2011) Evaluation of 2 new optical biometry devices and comparison with the current gold standard biometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 37(3):513–517CrossRefPubMed Chen YA, Hirnschall N, Findl O (2011) Evaluation of 2 new optical biometry devices and comparison with the current gold standard biometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 37(3):513–517CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Kaswin G, Rousseau A, Mgarrech M, Barreau E, Labetoulle M (2014) Biometry and intraocular lens power calculation results with a new optical biometry device: comparison with the gold standard. J Cataract Refract Surg 40:593–600CrossRefPubMed Kaswin G, Rousseau A, Mgarrech M, Barreau E, Labetoulle M (2014) Biometry and intraocular lens power calculation results with a new optical biometry device: comparison with the gold standard. J Cataract Refract Surg 40:593–600CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Rohrer K, Frueh BE, Wälti R, Clemetson IA, Tappeiner C, Goldblum D (2009) Comparison and evaluation of ocular biometry using a new noncontact optical low-coherence reflectometer. Ophthalmology 116:2087–2092CrossRefPubMed Rohrer K, Frueh BE, Wälti R, Clemetson IA, Tappeiner C, Goldblum D (2009) Comparison and evaluation of ocular biometry using a new noncontact optical low-coherence reflectometer. Ophthalmology 116:2087–2092CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Rabsilber TM, Jepsen C, Auffarth GU, Holzer MP (2010) Intraocular lens power calculation: clinical comparison of 2 optical biometry devices. J Cataract Refract Surg 36:230–234CrossRefPubMed Rabsilber TM, Jepsen C, Auffarth GU, Holzer MP (2010) Intraocular lens power calculation: clinical comparison of 2 optical biometry devices. J Cataract Refract Surg 36:230–234CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Cruysberg LPJ, Doors M, Verbakel F, Berendschot TTJM, De Brabander J, Nuijts RMMA (2010) Evaluation of the Lenstar LS 900 non-contact biometer. Br J Ophthalmol 94:106–110CrossRefPubMed Cruysberg LPJ, Doors M, Verbakel F, Berendschot TTJM, De Brabander J, Nuijts RMMA (2010) Evaluation of the Lenstar LS 900 non-contact biometer. Br J Ophthalmol 94:106–110CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Jasvinder S, Khang TF, Sarinder KK, Loo VP, Subrayan V (2011) Agreement analysis of LENSTAR with other techniques of biometry. Eye (Lond) 25(6):717–724CrossRef Jasvinder S, Khang TF, Sarinder KK, Loo VP, Subrayan V (2011) Agreement analysis of LENSTAR with other techniques of biometry. Eye (Lond) 25(6):717–724CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Lopez de la Fuente C, Sanchez-Cano A, Segura F, Pinilla I (2014) Comparison of anterior segment measurements obtained by three different devices in healthy eyes. Biomed Res Int 2014:498080PubMedPubMedCentral Lopez de la Fuente C, Sanchez-Cano A, Segura F, Pinilla I (2014) Comparison of anterior segment measurements obtained by three different devices in healthy eyes. Biomed Res Int 2014:498080PubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Shirayama M, Wang L, Weikert MP, Koch DD (2009) Comparison of corneal powers obtained from 4 different devices. Am J Ophthalmol 148(4):528–535CrossRefPubMed Shirayama M, Wang L, Weikert MP, Koch DD (2009) Comparison of corneal powers obtained from 4 different devices. Am J Ophthalmol 148(4):528–535CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Bullimore MA, Buehren T, Bissmann W (2013) Agreement between a partial coherence interferometer and 2 manual keratometers. J Cataract Refract Surg 39(10):1550–1560CrossRefPubMed Bullimore MA, Buehren T, Bissmann W (2013) Agreement between a partial coherence interferometer and 2 manual keratometers. J Cataract Refract Surg 39(10):1550–1560CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Huang J, Liao N, Savini G, Bao F, Yu Y, Lu W, Hu Q, Wang Q (2014) Comparison of anterior segment measurements with scheimpflug/placido photography-based topography system and IOLMaster partial coherence interferometry in patients with cataracts. J Ophthalmol 2014:540760PubMedPubMedCentral Huang J, Liao N, Savini G, Bao F, Yu Y, Lu W, Hu Q, Wang Q (2014) Comparison of anterior segment measurements with scheimpflug/placido photography-based topography system and IOLMaster partial coherence interferometry in patients with cataracts. J Ophthalmol 2014:540760PubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Nemeth J, Fekete O, Pesztenlehrer N (2003) Optical and ultrasound measurement of axial length and anterior chamber depth for intraocular lens calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg 29:85–88CrossRefPubMed Nemeth J, Fekete O, Pesztenlehrer N (2003) Optical and ultrasound measurement of axial length and anterior chamber depth for intraocular lens calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg 29:85–88CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Huynh SC, Mai TQ, Kifley A, Wang JJ, Rose KA, Mitchell P (2006) An evaluation of keratometry in 6-year-old children. Cornea 25:383–387CrossRefPubMed Huynh SC, Mai TQ, Kifley A, Wang JJ, Rose KA, Mitchell P (2006) An evaluation of keratometry in 6-year-old children. Cornea 25:383–387CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Ma JJ, Tseng SS (2008) Simple method for accurate alignment in toric phakic and aphakic intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:1631–1636CrossRefPubMed Ma JJ, Tseng SS (2008) Simple method for accurate alignment in toric phakic and aphakic intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:1631–1636CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparison of keratometric measurements obtained by the Verion Image Guided System with optical biometry and auto-keratorefractometer
Authors
Leyla Asena
Sirel Gür Güngör
Ahmet Akman
Publication date
01-04-2017
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
International Ophthalmology / Issue 2/2017
Print ISSN: 0165-5701
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2630
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-016-0274-8

Other articles of this Issue 2/2017

International Ophthalmology 2/2017 Go to the issue