Comparison of two biometers: A swept-source optical coherence tomography and an optical low-coherence reflectometry biometer

Repeatability and reproducibility of a new fully automatic measurement optical low coherence reflectometry biometer and agreement with swept-source optical coherence tomography-based biometer

AIMS

To assess the repeatability and reproducibility of the ocular measurements obtained with the Suoer SW-9000 μm Plus, a new fully automatic biometer based on optical low coherence reflectometry (OLCR) biometer, and to compare them to those obtained by a swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT)-based biometer.

METHODS

This prospective study consisted of 115 eyes of 115 healthy subjects. The measurements were taken by the two optical biometers in random order. The measured parameters were axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), aqueous depth (AQD), anterior chamber depth (ACD), mean keratometry (Km), lens thickness (LT) and corneal diameter (CD). To evaluate the intraobserver repeatability and interobserver reproducibility, the within-subject SD, test-retest variability, coefficient of variation (CoV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were adopted. The Bland-Altman plot was drawn to assess the agreement.

RESULTS

The repeatability and reproducibility of all parameters for the new device were excellent (ICC>0.960 and CoV<0.71%). The Bland-Altman plots showed high agreement between the OLCR-based and SS-OCT-based devices for AL, CCT, AQD, ACD, Km and LT, with narrow 95% limit of agreements (LoAs) (-0.08 mm to 0.06 mm, -15.91 µm to -1.01 µm, -0.09 mm to 0.09 mm, -0.09 mm to 0.08 mm, -0.47 D to 0.35 D, -0.05 mm to 0.16 mm, respectively) and moderate agreement for CD (95% LoA: -0.67 mm to -0.01 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

The new Suoer SW-9000 μm Plus biometer showed excellent repeatability and reproducibility. All the parameters obtained by this biometer were similar to those measured by SS-OCT-based biometer.

Interchangeability in Automated Corneal Diameter Measurements Across Different Biometric Devices: A Systematic Review of Agreement Studies

PURPOSE

To provide an up-to-date review of the agreement in automated white-to-white (WTW) measurement between the latest topographic and biometric devices.

METHODS

In this systematic review, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched for articles published between 2017 and 2023, focusing on WTW agreement studies on adult, virgin eyes, with or without cataract and no other ocular comorbidities. Studies evaluating WTW measurements performed with autokeratometers, manual calipers, or manual image analysis were excluded. When available, the following metrics for the agreement of WTW measurements between pairs of devices were included: mean difference ± standard deviation, 95% limits of agreement (LoA), LoA width, 95% confidence interval (95 CI%), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS

Forty-one studies, covering comparisons for 19 devices, were included. Altogether, 81 paired comparisons were performed for 4,595 eyes of 4,002 individuals. The mean difference in WTW measurements between devices ranged from 0.01 mm up to 0.96 mm, with varying CI. The 95% LoA width ranged from 0.31 to 2.45 mm (median: 0.65 mm). The majority of pairwise comparisons reported LoA wider than 0.5 mm, a clinically significant value for phakic intraocular lens sizing.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly all analyzed studies demonstrated the lack of interchangeability of the WTW parameter. The corneal diameter, assessed by means of grayscale en-face image analysis, tended to demonstrate the lowest agreement among devices compared to other measured biometric parameters. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(3):e182-e194.].

Technical failure rates for biometry between swept-source and older-generation optical coherence methods: a review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Precise ocular measurements are fundamental for achieving excellent target refraction following both cataract surgery and refractive lens exchange. Biometry devices with swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) employ longer wavelengths (1055-1300 nm) in order to have better penetration through opaque lenses than those with partial coherence interferometry (PCI) or low-coherence optical reflectometry (LCOR) methods. However, to date a pooled analysis showing the technical failure rate (TFR) between the methods has not been published. The aim of this study was to compare the TFR in SS-OCT and in PCI/LCOR biometry.

METHODS

PubMed and Scopus were used to search the medical literature as of Feb 1, 2022. The following keywords were used in various combinations: optical biometry, partial coherence interferometry, low-coherence optical reflectometry, swept-source optical coherence tomography. Only clinical studies referring to patients undergoing routine cataract surgery, and employing at least two (PCI or LCOR vs. SS-OCT) optical methods for optical biometry in the same cohort of patients were included.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included in the final analysis, which presented results of 2,459 eyes of at least 1,853 patients. The overall TFR of all included studies was 5.47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.66-8.08%; overall I² = 91.49%). The TFR was significantly different among the three methods (p < 0.001): 15.72% for PCI (95% CI: 10.73-22.46%; I² = 99.62%), 6.88% for LCOR (95% CI: 3.26-13.92%; I² = 86.44%), and 1.51% for SS-OCT (95% CI: 0.94-2.41%; I² = 24.64%). The pooled TFR for infrared methods (PCI and LCOR) was 11.12% (95% CI: 8.45-14.52%; I² = 78.28%), and was also significantly different to that of SS-OCT: 1.51% (95% CI: 0.94-2.41%; I² = 24.64%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A meta-analysis of the TFR of different biometry methods highlighted that SS-OCT biometry resulted in significantly decreased TFR compared to PCI/LCOR devices.

Spectral-Domain OCT Lens Meridian Position as a Metric to Estimate Postoperative Anatomical Lens Position

PURPOSE

To evaluate the prediction of postoperative anatomical lens position (ALP) using intraoperative spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) lens anatomy metrics in patients who underwent femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery.

METHODS

Intraoperative SD-OCT (Catalys; Johnson & Johnson Vision) and postoperative optical biometry (IOLMaster 700; Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) were used to assess anterior segment landmarks, including lens thickness, lens volume, anterior chamber depth, lens meridian position (LMP), and measured ALP. LMP was defined as the distance from the corneal epithelium to the lens equator, and ALP was defined as the distance from the corneal epithelium to the IOL surface. Eyes were divided into groups according to axial length (> 22.5 mm, 22.5 to 24.5 mm, and > 24.5 mm) and IOL type (Tecnis ZCB00 [Johnson & Johnson Vision]; AcrySof SN-60WF [Alcon Laboratories, Inc], or enVista MX60E [Bausch & Lomb]) to further analyze the correlation between LMP and ALP. Theoretical effective lens position was back-calculated using a specific formula. Primary outcome was correlation between postoperative measured ALP and LMP.

RESULTS

A total of 97 eyes were included in this study. Linear regression analysis displayed a statistically significant correlation between intraoperative LMP and postoperative ALP (R² = 0.522; P < .01). No statistically significant correlation was observed between LMP and lens thickness (R² = 0.039; P = .06) or between ALP and lens thickness (R² = 0.02; P = .992). The greatest predictor for ALP was LMP (β = 0.766, P < .001; R² = 0.523).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative SD-OCT-measured LMP correlated better than anterior chamber depth and axial length to postoperative ALP. Further studies are necessary to analyze the impact of preoperative or intraoperative LMP measurements on postoperative refractive outcomes. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(3):165-170.].

Axial length measurement failure rates using optical biometry based on swept-source OCT in cataractous eyes

INTRODUCTION

Ocular dimensions measurement is extremely important in cataract procedures and refractive surgery. The use of optical techniques for axial measurements has been developed in recent years.

AREAS COVERED

The purpose was to summarize the outcomes reported when swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) optical biometry failed during axial length measurement. A peer-reviewed literature search was carried out to identify publications reporting clinical outcomes for cataractous eyes measured with SS-OCT optical biometers available on the market. A comprehensive analysis of the available data was performed, focusing on parameters such as the sample of eyes evaluated, failure rates, and specifically, the cataract type when the measurement was not possible. 27 studies were included in this review. In general, SS-OCT biometers lead to only small failure rates when measuring axial length (but in some cases up to 38.49%). In the few cases where the measurement was not possible, the cataract type of the eyes was mainly mature white or grade ≥ IV. SS-OCT optical biometers show good outcomes when measuring axial length in eyes with advanced cataracts.

EXPERT OPINION

We believe that the use of SS-OCT technology may be considered the gold standard for measuring axial length in any type of cataract.

Agreement of predicted intraocular lens power using swept-source optical coherence tomography and partial coherence interferometry

PURPOSE

To analyze the agreement of the predicted intraocular lens (IOL) power obtained with ANTERION, IOLMaster 700 and Pentacam AXL biometers.

METHODS

We calculated the monofocal and trifocal IOL power using the SRK/T, Haigis, Barrett Universal II and Hoffer Q formulas for 106 eyes. IOL power agreement between devices was evaluated using the Bland-Altman method.

RESULTS

We found significant differences between biometers comparisons (p < 0.001). ANTERION and IOLMaster 700 did not produce significant IOL power differences (p > 0.05), with the same outcomes for medium- and long-eyes. No significant differences were found using the SRK/T, Haigis, or Hoffer Q formulas for short-eyes (p > 0.1). However, Barrett Universal II formula produced significant differences (p < 0.05) and these differences lay between the ANTERION and Pentacam AXL. ANTERION versus IOLMaster 700 comparison showed limits of agreement (LoA) varying from 1.1071D in SRK/T monofocal medium-eyes to 1.6828D in Hoffer Q trifocal all-eyes. The largest LoA (about 3.0D) was found for short-eyes when comparing the Pentacam AXL with the other two devices.

CONCLUSIONS

These devices provided statistically significant but clinically insignificant mean differences in predicted IOL power. However, wide LoA values suggest that for specific eyes these outcomes could be clinically significant.

Influence of lens position as detected by an anterior segment analysis system on postoperative refraction in cataract surgery

AIM

To predict postoperative intraocular lens (IOL) position using the Sirius anterior segment analysis system and investigate the effect of lens position and IOL type on postoperative refraction.

METHODS

A total of 97 patients (102 eyes) were enrolled in the final analysis. An anterior segment biometry measurement was performed preoperatively with Sirius and Lenstar. The results of predicted lens position (PLP) and IOL power were automatically calculated by the software used by the instruments. Effective lens position (ELP) was measured manually using Sirius 3mo postoperatively. Pearson's correlation analysis and linear regression analysis were used to determine the correlation of lens position to other parameters.

RESULTS

PLP and ELP were positively correlated to axial length (AL; r=0.42, P<0.0001 and r=0.49, P<0.0001, respectively). There was a weak correlation between the peLP (ELP-PLP) and the prediction error of spherical refraction (peSR; r=0.34, P<0.0001). The peLP of Softec HD IOL differed statistically from those of both the TECNIS ZCB00 and Sensor AR40E IOLs. Multiple linear regression was used to obtain the prediction formula: ELP=0.66+0.63×[aqueous depth (AQD)+0.6LT] (r=0.61, P<0.0001), and a new variable (AQD+0.6 LT) was found to have the strongest correlation with ELP.

CONCLUSION

The Sirius anterior segment analysis system is helpful to predict ELP, which reduces postoperative refraction error.

Clinical role of swept source optical coherence tomography in anterior segment diseases: a review

PURPOSE

To note the comprehensive role of swept source anterior segment optical coherence tomography (SS-ASOCT) in anterior segment diseases.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was carried out on various medical databases using the keywords, swept source anterior segment optical coherence tomography; SS-ASOCT; Cornea and SS-ASOCT; SS-ASOCT and glaucoma; SS-ASOCT and cataract; SS-ASOCT and biometer; SS-ASOCT and tear film and ocular surface.Original works and novel reports describing the potential role of SS-ASOCT in various anterior segment conditions were included.

RESULTS

After a thorough assessment of literature, it was clear that the SS-ASOCT did provide newer insights into many anterior eye conditions. The rapid scan acquisition, deeper tissue penetration, and higher magnification did enhance many of our understandings, which were previously not possible. In addition, lenticular assessment under complex clinical scenarios with automated values on objective scale has made it a worthy tool with immense future possibilities.

CONCLUSIONS

SS-ASOCT unveiled various anterior segment findings which were of clinical importance.

Agreement of white-to-white measurements with swept-source OCT, Scheimpflug and color LED devices

PURPOSE

To assess the interchangeability of different devices for measuring white-to-white (WTW) distance.

METHODS

WTW distance was measured in 53 eyes of 53 patients using Anterion swept-source optical coherence topographer (SS-OCT), IOLMaster 700 SS-OCT, Pentacam HR Scheimpflug and Cassini color LED. Statistical analysis was done by means of the Friedman test and the post hoc Tukey test. The Bland-Altman analysis was applied to carry out pairwise comparisons with the average difference, 95% confidence interval of the average difference and limits of agreement 95% (LoA).

RESULTS

WTW values obtained by the Anterion, IOLMaster 700, Pentacam HR and Cassini were: 11.84 ± 0.41 mm, 11.96 ± 0.41 mm, 11.68 ± 0.38 mm and 12.65 ± 0.52 mm, respectively. Statistically significant differences were found in all pairwise comparison (p < 0.001). The lowest mean difference was found between the Anterion and IOLMaster 700 (- 0.11 mm) and the highest between the Pentacam HR and Cassini (- 0.96 mm). The widest LoA ranges were those that compared any device with the Cassini. LoA ranges when the other three devices were compared among them were similar: Anterion versus IOLMaster 700, Anterion versus Pentacam HR and IOLMaster versus Pentacam HR (about 0.2 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that there were statistically significant differences in WTW measurement among the four devices, but under a clinical point of view, we believe that Anterion and IOLMaster 700 may be considered interchangeable and so Anterion and Pentacam HR, however, IOLMaster 700 and Pentacam HR may not and neither is Cassini with any of the other three devices.

Intraocular Lens Power Formulas, Biometry, and Intraoperative Aberrometry: A Review

The refractive outcome of cataract surgery is influenced by the choice of intraocular lens (IOL) power formula and the accuracy of the various devices used to measure the eye (including intraoperative aberrometry [IA]). This review aimed to cover the breadth of literature over the previous 10 years, focusing on 3 main questions: (1) What IOL power formulas currently are available and which is the most accurate? (2) What biometry devices are available, do the measurements they obtain differ from one another, and will this cause a clinically significant change in IOL power selection? and (3) Does IA improve refractive outcomes? A literature review was performed by searching the PubMed database for articles on each of these topics that identified 1313 articles, of which 166 were included in the review. For IOL power formulas, the Kane formula was the most accurate formula over the entire axial length (AL) spectrum and in both the short eye (AL, ≤22.0 mm) and long eye (AL, ≥26.0 mm) subgroups. Other formulas that performed well in the short-eye subgroup were the Olsen (4-factor), Haigis, and Hill-radial basis function (RBF) 1.0. In the long-eye group, the other formulas that performed well included the Barrett Universal II (BUII), Olsen (4-factor), or Holladay 1 with Wang-Koch adjustment. All biometry devices delivered highly reproducible measurements, and most comparative studies showed little difference in the average measures for all the biometric variables between devices. The differences seen resulted in minimal clinically significant effects on IOL power selection. The main difference found between devices was the ability to measure successfully through dense cataracts, with swept-source OCT-based machines performing better than partial coherence interferometry and optical low-coherence reflectometry devices. Intraoperative aberrometry generally improved outcomes for spherical and toric IOLs in eyes both with and without prior refractive surgery when the BUII and Hill-RBF, Barrett toric calculator, or Barrett True-K formulas were not used. When they were used, IA did not result in better outcomes.

Comparison of ocular parameters of two biometric measurement devices in highly myopic eyes

AIM

To compare the differences and agreement of ocular biometric parameters in highly myopic eyes obtained by optical biometric measurement instruments, the OA-2000 and IOLMaster 500.

METHODS

Totally, 90 patients (90 eyes) were included. They were divided into high myopia group and control group. Ocular parameters, including axial length (AL), mean keratometry (Km), anterior chamber depth (ACD), and white to white (WTW), were obtained from the OA-2000 and IOLMaster 500.

RESULTS

For the control group, we applied Bland-Altman graphs to assess the 95% limits of agreement (LoA) for most parameters including AL, ACD, Km, and WTW (-0.24 to 0.29 mm, -0.22 to 0.45 mm, -0.39 to 0.31 D, and -0.90 to 0.86 mm, respectively). In high myopia patients, AL, ACD, Km values had wider 95% LoA (-0.34 to 0.32 mm, -0.36 to 0.34 mm, -0.57 to 0.47 D, respectively), except WTW (-0.80 to 0.68 mm). Differences were not statistically significant between these two instruments (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Most parameters obtained by the OA-2000 and IOLMaster 500 are comparable, including the AL, ACD, and K values. Among them, the agreement of the high myopia patients is poor compared to the patients without high myopia.