Purchase this article with an account.
Shahed Ghoghawala, Sumit Garg, Matthew Wade, Roger Steinert; Comparison of Predicted versus Actual Refractive Outcome Using Two Commercially Available Biometers. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2013;54(15):823.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To compare the predicted residual refractive error from both the IOLMaster 500 to the Lenstar LS900 devices with the actual post-operative manifest refractive error.
A retrospective review of 22 eyes (which had biometry measurements by both the IOLMaster 500 and Lenstar LS900). The predicted refractive error (as calculated by the SRK/T, Holladay 1, Hoffer Q and Haigis formulas) that corresponded with the implanted IOL was noted for each device and compared to the patient’s postoperative refractive error.
While there was variation in the outcome for the 22 eyes post-surgery, the refractive deviation was statistically analyzed using an F test for Standard deviation. The F value for each of the varying formulas (SRK/T, Holladay 1, Hoffer Q, Haigis) was 1.16, 1.06, 1.06, 1.08, respectively. In order to prove a statistical difference between the devices, the threshold value needed for statistical significance was 2.46 (2 tailed, 95% CI for 20 DOF); thus, there was insufficient evidence to show a statistically significant difference in outcomes predicted by either device.
While both the IOLMaster 500 and the Lenstar LS 900 claim to offer an advantage in obtaining superior outcomes, there was no significant difference in predictive outcome by either machine.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only