Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Ophthalmology 3/2018

01-06-2018 | Original Paper

Comparison of biometric measurements obtained by the Verion Image-Guided System versus the auto-refracto-keratometer

Authors: Cecilio Velasco-Barona, Guadalupe Cervantes-Coste, Erick Mendoza-Schuster, Claudia Corredor-Ortega, Nadia L. Casillas-Chavarín, Alejandro Silva-Moreno, Manuel Garza-León, Roberto Gonzalez-Salinas

Published in: International Ophthalmology | Issue 3/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the biometric measurements obtained from the Verion Image-Guided System to those obtained by auto-refracto-keratometer in normal eyes.

Methods

This is a prospective, observational, comparative study conducted at the Asociación para Evitar la Ceguera en México I.A.P., Mexico. Three sets of keratometry measurements were obtained using the image-guided system to assess the coefficient of variation, the within-subject standard deviation and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). A paired Student t test was used to assess statistical significance between the Verion and the auto-refracto-keratometer. A Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) was obtained for all measurements, and the level of agreement was verified using Bland–Altman plots.

Results

The right eyes of 73 patients were evaluated by each platform. The Verion coefficient of variation was 0.3% for the flat and steep keratometry, with the ICC being greater than 0.9 for all parameters measured. Paired t test showed statistically significant differences between groups (P = 0.0001). A good correlation was evidenced for keratometry values between platforms (r = 0.903, P = 0.0001 for K1, and r = 0.890, P = 0.0001). Bland–Altman plots showed a wide data spread for all variables.

Conclusion

The image-guided system provided highly repeatable corneal power and keratometry measurements. However, significant differences were evidenced between the two platforms, and although values were highly correlated, they showed a wide data spread for all analysed variables; therefore, their interchangeable use for biometry assessment is not advisable.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Hayashi K, Hayashi H, Nakao F, Hayashi F (2000) Influence of astigmatism on multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses. Am J Ophthalmol 130(4):477–482CrossRefPubMed Hayashi K, Hayashi H, Nakao F, Hayashi F (2000) Influence of astigmatism on multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses. Am J Ophthalmol 130(4):477–482CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Yuan X, Song H, Peng G, Hua X, Tang X (2014) Clinical study prevalence of corneal astigmatism in patients before cataract surgery in Northern China. J Ophthalmol 2014:536412PubMedPubMedCentral Yuan X, Song H, Peng G, Hua X, Tang X (2014) Clinical study prevalence of corneal astigmatism in patients before cataract surgery in Northern China. J Ophthalmol 2014:536412PubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Reitblat OR, Levy A, Kleinmann G, Abulafia A, Assia EI (2016) Effect of posterior corneal astigmatism on power calculation and alignment of toric intraocular lenses: comparison of methodologies. J Cataract Refract Surg 42(2):217–225CrossRefPubMed Reitblat OR, Levy A, Kleinmann G, Abulafia A, Assia EI (2016) Effect of posterior corneal astigmatism on power calculation and alignment of toric intraocular lenses: comparison of methodologies. J Cataract Refract Surg 42(2):217–225CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Ventura BV, Al-Mohtaseb Z, Wang L, Koch DD, Weikert MP (2015) Repeatability and comparability of corneal power and corneal astigmatism obtained from a point-source color light-emitting diode topographer, a Placido-based corneal topographer, and a low-coherence reflectometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 41(10):2242–2250CrossRefPubMed Ventura BV, Al-Mohtaseb Z, Wang L, Koch DD, Weikert MP (2015) Repeatability and comparability of corneal power and corneal astigmatism obtained from a point-source color light-emitting diode topographer, a Placido-based corneal topographer, and a low-coherence reflectometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 41(10):2242–2250CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Zheng T, Chen Z, Lu Y (2016) Influence factors of estimation errors for total corneal astigmatism using keratometric astigmatism in patients before cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 42(1):84–94CrossRefPubMed Zheng T, Chen Z, Lu Y (2016) Influence factors of estimation errors for total corneal astigmatism using keratometric astigmatism in patients before cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 42(1):84–94CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Goebels S, Pattmöller M, Eppig T, Cayless A, Seitz B, Langenbucher A (2015) Comparison of 3 biometry devices in cataract patients. J Cataract Refract Surg 41(11):2387–2393CrossRefPubMed Goebels S, Pattmöller M, Eppig T, Cayless A, Seitz B, Langenbucher A (2015) Comparison of 3 biometry devices in cataract patients. J Cataract Refract Surg 41(11):2387–2393CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Li J, Chen H, Savini G et al (2016) Measurement agreement between a new biometer based on partial coherence interferometry and a validated biometer based on optical low-coherence reflectometry. J Cataract Refract Surg 42(1):68–75CrossRefPubMed Li J, Chen H, Savini G et al (2016) Measurement agreement between a new biometer based on partial coherence interferometry and a validated biometer based on optical low-coherence reflectometry. J Cataract Refract Surg 42(1):68–75CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Huang J, Savini G, Wu F et al (2015) Repeatability and reproducibility of ocular biometry using a new noncontact optical low-coherence interferometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 41(10):2233–2241CrossRefPubMed Huang J, Savini G, Wu F et al (2015) Repeatability and reproducibility of ocular biometry using a new noncontact optical low-coherence interferometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 41(10):2233–2241CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Elhofi AH, Helaly HA (2015) Comparison between digital and manual marking for toric intraocular lenses. Medicine 94(38):e1618-4CrossRef Elhofi AH, Helaly HA (2015) Comparison between digital and manual marking for toric intraocular lenses. Medicine 94(38):e1618-4CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Potvin R, Davison J (2015) Refractive cylinder outcomes after calculating toric intraocular lens cylinder power using total corneal refractive power. Clin Ophthalmol 19(9):1511–1517CrossRef Potvin R, Davison J (2015) Refractive cylinder outcomes after calculating toric intraocular lens cylinder power using total corneal refractive power. Clin Ophthalmol 19(9):1511–1517CrossRef
11.
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 Cataract Refract Surg 31(5):333–337CrossRef 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 Cataract Refract Surg 31(5):333–337CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Mueller A, Thomas BC, Auffarth GU, Holzer MP (2016) Comparison of a new image-guided system versus partial coherence interferometry, Scheimpflug imaging, and optical low-coherence reflectometry devices: keratometry and repeatability. J Cataract Refract Surg 42(5):672–678CrossRefPubMed Mueller A, Thomas BC, Auffarth GU, Holzer MP (2016) Comparison of a new image-guided system versus partial coherence interferometry, Scheimpflug imaging, and optical low-coherence reflectometry devices: keratometry and repeatability. J Cataract Refract Surg 42(5):672–678CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Santodomingo-Rubido J, Mallen EAH, Gilmartin B, Wolffsohn JS (2002) A new non-contact optical device for ocular biometry. Br J Ophthalmol 86(4):458–462CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Santodomingo-Rubido J, Mallen EAH, Gilmartin B, Wolffsohn JS (2002) A new non-contact optical device for ocular biometry. Br J Ophthalmol 86(4):458–462CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
15.
go back to reference Srivannaboon S, Chirapapaisan C, Chonpimai P, Koodkaew S (2015) Comparison of corneal astigmatism measurements of 2 optical biometer models for toric intraocular lens selection. J Cataract Refract Surg 41(2):364–371CrossRefPubMed Srivannaboon S, Chirapapaisan C, Chonpimai P, Koodkaew S (2015) Comparison of corneal astigmatism measurements of 2 optical biometer models for toric intraocular lens selection. J Cataract Refract Surg 41(2):364–371CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Asena L, Güngör SG, Akman A. (2016) Comparison of keratometric measurements obtained by the Verion Image Guided System with optical biometry and auto-keratorefractometer. Int Ophthalmol 1–9. [Epub ahead of print] Asena L, Güngör SG, Akman A. (2016) Comparison of keratometric measurements obtained by the Verion Image Guided System with optical biometry and auto-keratorefractometer. Int Ophthalmol 1–9. [Epub ahead of print]
18.
go back to reference Lauschke JL, Lawless M, Sutton G, Roberts TV, Hodge C (2016) Assessment of corneal curvature using verion optical imaging system: a comparative study. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 44(5):369–376CrossRefPubMed Lauschke JL, Lawless M, Sutton G, Roberts TV, Hodge C (2016) Assessment of corneal curvature using verion optical imaging system: a comparative study. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 44(5):369–376CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Srivannaboon S, Soeharnila Chirapapaisan C, Chonpimai P (2012) Comparison of corneal astigmatism and axis location in cataract patients measured by total corneal power, automated keratometry, and simulated keratometry. J Cataract Refract Surg 38:2088–2093CrossRefPubMed Srivannaboon S, Soeharnila Chirapapaisan C, Chonpimai P (2012) Comparison of corneal astigmatism and axis location in cataract patients measured by total corneal power, automated keratometry, and simulated keratometry. J Cataract Refract Surg 38:2088–2093CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparison of biometric measurements obtained by the Verion Image-Guided System versus the auto-refracto-keratometer
Authors
Cecilio Velasco-Barona
Guadalupe Cervantes-Coste
Erick Mendoza-Schuster
Claudia Corredor-Ortega
Nadia L. Casillas-Chavarín
Alejandro Silva-Moreno
Manuel Garza-León
Roberto Gonzalez-Salinas
Publication date
01-06-2018
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
International Ophthalmology / Issue 3/2018
Print ISSN: 0165-5701
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2630
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-017-0541-3

Other articles of this Issue 3/2018

International Ophthalmology 3/2018 Go to the issue