Intraobserver and interobserver repeatability of ocular components measurement in cataract eyes using a new optical low coherence reflectometer

BackgroundThe purpose of the study was to assess intraobserver and interobserver repeatability of eight ocular components measurement in cataract eyes using the optical low-coherence reflectometer Lenstar LS 900®.MethodsFive consecutive measurements of ocular components were taken by two examiners using the Lenstar. Components analyzed were: central corneal thickness, lens thickness, anterior chamber depth, axial length, retinal thickness, keratometry, white-to-white distance, and pupillometry. Within-subject standard deviation and the coefficient of variation were calculated for evaluation of intraobserver repeatability. Bland–Altman analysis was used for assessment of interobserver repeatability.ResultsThirty-two eyes of 22 patients were included. For both observers, the smallest intraobserver coefficient of variation was obtained for axial length, while the largest was found for corneal steepest meridian position. Interobserver repeatability demonstrated less repeatable results for white-to-white distance and corneal steepest meridian position. Considering axial length and anterior chamber depth values, predicted refractive error was 0 ± 0.05 D and 0.02 ± 0.19 D respectively in 95% of observations.ConclusionThe Lenstar LS 900® evidenced excellent repeatability and observers´ independent results of all components analyzed except white-to-white distance and corneal steepest meridian position measurements. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study on interobserver repeatability of optical low-coherence reflectometry in cataract eyes.

[1]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[2]  T. Olsen,et al.  Improved accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation with the Zeiss IOLMaster. , 2006, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[3]  R. Hoffman,et al.  Immersion A‐scan compared with partial coherence interferometry: Outcomes analysis , 2002, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[4]  M. Holzer,et al.  Accuracy of a new partial coherence interferometry analyser for biometric measurements , 2009, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[5]  B. Lege,et al.  Comparison of immersion ultrasound biometry and partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens calculation according to Haigis , 2000, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[6]  D. Altman,et al.  Measurement error. , 1996, BMJ.

[7]  David V Leaming,et al.  Practice styles and preferences of ASCRS members—2003 survey , 2004, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[8]  K. Rohrer,et al.  Comparison and evaluation of ocular biometry using a new noncontact optical low-coherence reflectometer. , 2009, Ophthalmology.

[9]  T. Olsen,et al.  Calculation of intraocular lens power: a review. , 2007, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[10]  P. Myles,et al.  Using the Bland-Altman method to measure agreement with repeated measures. , 2007, British journal of anaesthesia.

[11]  David P Piñero,et al.  Corneal diameter measurements by corneal topography and angle‐to‐angle measurements by optical coherence tomography: Evaluation of equivalence , 2008, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[12]  A. Beckett,et al.  AKUFO AND IBARAPA. , 1965, Lancet.

[13]  H. Gerding,et al.  Comparison of two partial coherence interferometry devices for ocular biometry. , 2010, Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde.

[14]  R. D. Stulting,et al.  Comparing immersion ultrasound with partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens power calculation. , 2008, Ophthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging : the official journal of the International Society for Imaging in the Eye.

[15]  J M Bland,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement , 1986 .

[16]  Thomas Kohnen,et al.  Comparison of manual and automated methods to determine horizontal corneal diameter , 2004, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[17]  G. Savini,et al.  Comparison of 2 laser instruments for measuring axial length , 2010, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[18]  J S Wolffsohn,et al.  A new optical low coherence reflectometry device for ocular biometry in cataract patients , 2009, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[19]  R. Nuijts,et al.  Evaluation of the Lenstar LS 900 non-contact biometer , 2009, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[20]  A. Fercher,et al.  Refractive outcome of cataract surgery using partial coherence interferometry and ultrasound biometry: Clinical feasibility study of a commercial prototype II , 2002, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[21]  M. Rajan,et al.  Partial coherence laser interferometry vs conventional ultrasound biometry in intraocular lens power calculations , 2002, Eye.