Abstract:Objective::To compare the accuracy of total keratometry (TK) and conventional keratometry (K) for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation based on the new swept-source optical coherence tomography biometry.Methods::This was a prospective self controlled study, 29 patients (58 eyes) with binocular age-related cataract were enrolled for the phacoemulsification combined with diffractive trifocal IOL implantation during May 2021 and November 2021 in Peking University People's Hospital. Eyes were assessed using a swept-source optical biometer (IOLMaster 700). Axial length, anterior chamber depth, central corneal thickness, lens thickness, posterior keratometry, TK, and white-to-white corneal diameter were recorded. Emmetropic IOL power was calculated using K and TK in the current standard formulas (SRK/T, Haigis, Holladay2, and Barrett Universal II) and a new formula developed for TK (Barrett TK Universal II). Selected IOL power and predicted refractive outcomes were recorded. Corrected distance visual acuity and postoperative manifest refraction were measured 1 month and 3 months postoperatively. The absolute prediction error, mean absolute error, median absolute error (MedAE), and the percentages of eyes within prediction errors of ±0.25 D, ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D were calculated for all IOL formulas. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and McNemar's tests were used to analyze the difference.Results::There was strong agreement between K and TK (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.996), with a mean difference of 0.007 D. A relatively lower MedAE values were observed for Haigis and Barrett Universal Ⅱ for TK when compared with K. MedAE from TK was a trend toward larger than that from K in SRK/T and Holladay2 formulas. A relatively greater proportion of eyes fell within ±0.25 D and ±0.50 D of the predicted postoperative spherical equivalent range in the TK group than in the K group for Barrett Universal Ⅱformula. Proportion of eyes within ±0.25 D and ±0.50 D of predicted refraction were slightly higher in the K group for SRK/T, Haigis and Holladay2. However, differences in MedAEs, and percentages of eyes within the above prediction errors were not statistically significant.Conclusions::Conventional K and TK for IOL calculation showed strong agreement for refractive prediction for IOL power calculation based on IOLMaster 700, and with a trend toward better refractive outcomes using TK for Barrett Universal Ⅱformula.

Comparison of the Different Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Cataract Patients

Comparison of Two Optical Biometers in Intraocular Lens Power Calculation

Comparison and evaluation of ocular biometry using the noncontact Lenstar, IOL-Master and contact ultrasound A-scan

Accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation using three optical biometry measurement devices: the OA-2000, Lenstar-LS900 and IOLMaster-500

A Comparative Study about Axial Length Measurement Between IOLMaster and Adjusted A-scan Ultrasound Methods in Silicone-Filled Eyes

Comparison of ocular variables obtained from Tomey OA-2000 and IOLMaster

Comparison of Contact and Non-contact Measurements of Axial Length and Anterior Chamber Depth

Evaluation of repeatability and agreement of two optical biometers for intraocular lens power calculation

Comparison of the Accuracy of Total Keratometry and Conventional Keratometry for IOL Power Calculation Based on the New Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Biometry

Accuracy of swept-source optical coherence tomography based biometry for intraocular lens power calculation: a retrospective cross–sectional study

Evaluation of Selected Biometric Parameters in Cataract Patients-A Comparison between Argos® and IOLMaster 700®: Two Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography-Based Biometers

Comparison of the IOL Master and Pentacam in the measurement of anterior segment parameters in patients with high myopia and cataracts

Evaluation of the Repeatability of the Lenstar and Comparison with Two Other Non-Contact Biometric Devices in Myopes.

Comparison of the biometric measurements obtained using the Lenstar, Pentacam and ultrasound pachymetry methods in cataract patients

Comparison of ocular biometric measurements and intraocular lens power calculation using different methods in eyes with implantable collamer lenses

Comparison and evaluation of four different techniques of keratometric measurements

Comparison of ocular biometric parameters between two swept-source optical coherence tomography devices and Scheimpflug tomography in patients with cataract

Agreement between swept-source optical biometry and Scheimpflug-based tomography in eyes with previous myopic refractive surgery

Comparison of anterior segment parameters of patients with myopia measured using 2 swept-source optical coherent biometry devices

Accuracy of intraocular lens calculation formulas based on swept-source OCT biometer in cataract patients with phakic intraocular lens

A Multi Comparison of 8 Different Intraocular Lens Biometry Formulae, Including a Machine Learning Thin Lens Formula (MM) and an Inbuilt Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography Ray Tracing Formula