Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Comparison between optical and acoustical biometry].

Authors: C P A, Gantenbein; K W, Ruprecht;

[Comparison between optical and acoustical biometry].

Abstract

Our current standard biometric measurement was compared to IOL-Master measurement.One hundred sixty-two consecutive cataractous eyes were examined using the IOL-Master as well as the acoustic biometry combined with the Javal-Keratometer. In all eyes, the intraocular lens power to be implanted was chosen by means of the SRK/T formula, based on the measurements conducted with our standard method. The postoperative refraction achieved, obtained at least 6 weeks after surgery from the treating ophthalmologists, was communicated to us. The results were compared and analysed statistically.Comparison of the eye lengths, as well as of the keratometric measurements showed good correlation between the measurements obtained by both methods, the acoustic biometry yielding significantly (p < 0.001) shorter axial-lengths than the IOL-Master (r = 0.985) and the Javal yielding significantly (p < 0.001) higher mean corneal refraction power than the IOL-Master. The accuracy of the refraction obtained postoperatively compared to the preoperative aim was better with our standard method compared to the IOL-Master.The presumed systemic differences in measurement results could be verified. The IOL-Master currently has two advantages: it provides a substantial gain in time and the measurements can be delegated. Analysis of the subgroups showed that the "A" constant should be adapted with the IOL-Master to improve predictability of the postoperative refraction.

Keywords

Adult, Aged, 80 and over, Male, Biometry, Light, Diagnostic Techniques, Ophthalmological, Middle Aged, Cataract, Interferometry, Sound, Humans, Female, Prospective Studies, Aged

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    8
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
8
Average
Top 10%
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!