Comparison of predictions made by the intraocular lens master and ultrasound biometry

Anand B. Bhatt, Amy C. Schefler, William J Feuer, Sonia H Yoo, Timothy G. Murray

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To ascertain whether a new instrument that uses partial coherence interferometry technology (Intraocular Lens Master [IOLm]) or ultrasound biometry provides a more accurate prediction of refractive outcomes in cataract surgery. Methods: This was a retrospective medical record review of 421 eyes of 304 patients who underwent cataract surgery with the IOLm and ultrasound biometry from January 3, 2002, to December 2, 2005. The mean difference between the prediction with each technology and the final spherical equivalent was compared. Circumstances in which both technologies failed to make accurate predictions were investigated. Results: The mean (SD) of the difference between predicted refraction and final spherical equivalent was -0.43 (0.84) diopters (D) for the IOLm and -0.60 (0.87) D for ultrasound biometry, indicating that on average the IOLm was a closer predictor than ultrasound biometry of the final spherical equivalent (P< .001). The IOLm had a 5% higher likelihood of predicting a spherical equivalent within 0.25 D than ultrasound biometry (P = .06), an 8% higher likelihood of predicting a spherical equivalent within 0.50 D (P<.001), and an 8% higher likelihood of predicting a spherical equivalent within 1.00 D (P<.001). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the most eyes examined for cataract surgery in a prospective fashion with both the IOLm and ultrasound biometry. The IOLm is a better predictor of postoperative refraction than ultrasound biometry, particularly within close ranges.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)929-933
Number of pages5
JournalArchives of Ophthalmology
Volume126
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2008

Fingerprint

Biometry
Intraocular Lenses
Cataract
Technology
Interferometry
Medical Records

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

Comparison of predictions made by the intraocular lens master and ultrasound biometry. / Bhatt, Anand B.; Schefler, Amy C.; Feuer, William J; Yoo, Sonia H; Murray, Timothy G.

In: Archives of Ophthalmology, Vol. 126, No. 7, 01.07.2008, p. 929-933.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bhatt, Anand B. ; Schefler, Amy C. ; Feuer, William J ; Yoo, Sonia H ; Murray, Timothy G. / Comparison of predictions made by the intraocular lens master and ultrasound biometry. In: Archives of Ophthalmology. 2008 ; Vol. 126, No. 7. pp. 929-933.
@article{f9c2ef745c8e4be1979af20651ad0b74,
title = "Comparison of predictions made by the intraocular lens master and ultrasound biometry",
abstract = "Objective: To ascertain whether a new instrument that uses partial coherence interferometry technology (Intraocular Lens Master [IOLm]) or ultrasound biometry provides a more accurate prediction of refractive outcomes in cataract surgery. Methods: This was a retrospective medical record review of 421 eyes of 304 patients who underwent cataract surgery with the IOLm and ultrasound biometry from January 3, 2002, to December 2, 2005. The mean difference between the prediction with each technology and the final spherical equivalent was compared. Circumstances in which both technologies failed to make accurate predictions were investigated. Results: The mean (SD) of the difference between predicted refraction and final spherical equivalent was -0.43 (0.84) diopters (D) for the IOLm and -0.60 (0.87) D for ultrasound biometry, indicating that on average the IOLm was a closer predictor than ultrasound biometry of the final spherical equivalent (P< .001). The IOLm had a 5{\%} higher likelihood of predicting a spherical equivalent within 0.25 D than ultrasound biometry (P = .06), an 8{\%} higher likelihood of predicting a spherical equivalent within 0.50 D (P<.001), and an 8{\%} higher likelihood of predicting a spherical equivalent within 1.00 D (P<.001). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the most eyes examined for cataract surgery in a prospective fashion with both the IOLm and ultrasound biometry. The IOLm is a better predictor of postoperative refraction than ultrasound biometry, particularly within close ranges.",
author = "Bhatt, {Anand B.} and Schefler, {Amy C.} and Feuer, {William J} and Yoo, {Sonia H} and Murray, {Timothy G.}",
year = "2008",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/archopht.126.7.929",
language = "English",
volume = "126",
pages = "929--933",
journal = "JAMA Ophthalmology",
issn = "2168-6165",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of predictions made by the intraocular lens master and ultrasound biometry

AU - Bhatt, Anand B.

AU - Schefler, Amy C.

AU - Feuer, William J

AU - Yoo, Sonia H

AU - Murray, Timothy G.

PY - 2008/7/1

Y1 - 2008/7/1

N2 - Objective: To ascertain whether a new instrument that uses partial coherence interferometry technology (Intraocular Lens Master [IOLm]) or ultrasound biometry provides a more accurate prediction of refractive outcomes in cataract surgery. Methods: This was a retrospective medical record review of 421 eyes of 304 patients who underwent cataract surgery with the IOLm and ultrasound biometry from January 3, 2002, to December 2, 2005. The mean difference between the prediction with each technology and the final spherical equivalent was compared. Circumstances in which both technologies failed to make accurate predictions were investigated. Results: The mean (SD) of the difference between predicted refraction and final spherical equivalent was -0.43 (0.84) diopters (D) for the IOLm and -0.60 (0.87) D for ultrasound biometry, indicating that on average the IOLm was a closer predictor than ultrasound biometry of the final spherical equivalent (P< .001). The IOLm had a 5% higher likelihood of predicting a spherical equivalent within 0.25 D than ultrasound biometry (P = .06), an 8% higher likelihood of predicting a spherical equivalent within 0.50 D (P<.001), and an 8% higher likelihood of predicting a spherical equivalent within 1.00 D (P<.001). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the most eyes examined for cataract surgery in a prospective fashion with both the IOLm and ultrasound biometry. The IOLm is a better predictor of postoperative refraction than ultrasound biometry, particularly within close ranges.

AB - Objective: To ascertain whether a new instrument that uses partial coherence interferometry technology (Intraocular Lens Master [IOLm]) or ultrasound biometry provides a more accurate prediction of refractive outcomes in cataract surgery. Methods: This was a retrospective medical record review of 421 eyes of 304 patients who underwent cataract surgery with the IOLm and ultrasound biometry from January 3, 2002, to December 2, 2005. The mean difference between the prediction with each technology and the final spherical equivalent was compared. Circumstances in which both technologies failed to make accurate predictions were investigated. Results: The mean (SD) of the difference between predicted refraction and final spherical equivalent was -0.43 (0.84) diopters (D) for the IOLm and -0.60 (0.87) D for ultrasound biometry, indicating that on average the IOLm was a closer predictor than ultrasound biometry of the final spherical equivalent (P< .001). The IOLm had a 5% higher likelihood of predicting a spherical equivalent within 0.25 D than ultrasound biometry (P = .06), an 8% higher likelihood of predicting a spherical equivalent within 0.50 D (P<.001), and an 8% higher likelihood of predicting a spherical equivalent within 1.00 D (P<.001). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the most eyes examined for cataract surgery in a prospective fashion with both the IOLm and ultrasound biometry. The IOLm is a better predictor of postoperative refraction than ultrasound biometry, particularly within close ranges.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=47549101615&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=47549101615&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/archopht.126.7.929

DO - 10.1001/archopht.126.7.929

M3 - Article

C2 - 18625938

AN - SCOPUS:47549101615

VL - 126

SP - 929

EP - 933

JO - JAMA Ophthalmology

JF - JAMA Ophthalmology

SN - 2168-6165

IS - 7

ER -