Comparison of refractive outcomes using immersion ultrasound biometry and IOLMaster biometry

Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology

Volumn 37, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 566-569

  Landers, John ^a   Goggin, Michael ^a  

^a QUEEN ELIZABETH HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

Biometry; Immersion ultrasound; IOLMaster; Target refraction

Indexed keywords

AGED; ANTERIOR EYE CHAMBER DEPTH; ARTICLE; BIOMETRY; CATARACT EXTRACTION; DEVICE; EYE REFRACTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYPERMETROPIA; IMMERSION ULTRASOUND BIOMETRY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; IOLMASTER BIOMETRY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MYOPIA; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; REFRACTION ERROR; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

AGED; BIOMETRY; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERFEROMETRY; LENS IMPLANTATION, INTRAOCULAR; LIGHT; MALE; PHACOEMULSIFICATION; PSEUDOPHAKIA; REFRACTION, OCULAR; REFRACTIVE ERRORS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

EID: 68349133399     PISSN: 14426404     EISSN: 14429071     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2009.02091.x     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Olsen T. Sources of error in intraocular lens power calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg 1992; 18: 125-9.
2. Watson A, Armstrong R. Contact or immersion technique for axial length measurement? Aust NZ J Ophthalmol 1999; 27: 49-51.
3. Santodomingo-Rubido J, Mallen EAH, Gilmartin B, Wolffsohn JS. A new non-contact optical device for ocular biometry. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86: 458-62.
4. Connors R, Boseman P, Olson RJ. Accuracy and reproducibility of biometry using partial coherence interferometry. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28: 235-8.
5. Kielhorn I, Rajan MS, Tesha PM, Subryan VR, Bell JA. Clinical assessment of the Zeiss IOLMaster. J Cataract Refract Surg 2003; 29: 518-22.
6. Kiss B, Findl O, Menapace R et al. Biometry of cataractous eyes using partial coherence interferometry: Clinical feasibility study of a commercial prototype I. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28: 224-9.
7. Tehrani M, Krummenauer F, Kumar R, Dick HB. Comparison of biometric measurements using partial coherence interferometry and applanation ultrasound. J Cataract Refract Surg 2003; 29: 747-52.
8. Findl O, Drexler W, Menapace R, Heinzl H, Hitzenberger CK, Fercher AF. Improved prediction of intraocular lens power using partial coherence interferometry. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001; 27: 861-7.
9. Rose LT, Moshegov CN. Comparison of the Zeiss IOLMaster and applanation A-scan ultrasound biometry for intraocular lens calculation. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2003; 31: 121-4.
10. Kiss B, Findl O, Menapace R et al. Refractive outcome of cataract surgery using partial coherence interferometry and ultrasound biometry: clinical feasibility study of a commercial prototype II. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28: 230-4.
11. Huynh SC, Mai TQ, Kifley A, Wang JJ, Rose KA, Mitchell P. An evaluation of keratometry in 6-year-old children. Cornea 2006; 25: 383-7.
12. Rajan MS, Keilhorn I, Bell JA. Partial coherence laser interferometry vs conventional ultrasound biometry in intraocular lens power calculations. Eye 2002; 16: 552-6.
13. Drexler W, Findl O, Menapace R et al. Partial coherence interferometry: a novel approach to biometry in cataract surgery. Am J Ophthalmol 1998; 126: 524-34.
14. Butcher JM, O'Brien C. The reproducibility of biometry and keratometry measurements. Eye 1991; 5: 708-11.
15. Packer M, Fine H, Hoffman RS, Coffman PG, Brown LK. Immersion A-scan compared with partial coherence interferometry. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28: 239-42.
16. Haigis W, Lege B, Miller N, Schneider B. Comparison of immersion ultrasound biometry and partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens calculation according to Haigis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2000; 238: 765-73.
17. Narváez J, Cherwek H, Stulting D et al. Comparing immersion ultrasound with partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens power calculation. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging 2008; 39: 30-4.