Department of Experimental Ophthalmology, Saarland University, Kirrberger Str 100 Bldg. 22, 66424, Homburg, Saar, Germany.
Dr. Rolf M. Schwiete Center for Limbal Stem Cell and Aniridia Research, Saarland University, Homburg, Saar, Germany.
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2023 Apr;261(4):999-1010. doi: 10.1007/s00417-022-05870-9. Epub 2022 Oct 29.
To compare biometric measures from 2 modern swept-source OCT biometers (IOLMaster700 (Z, Carl-Zeiss-Meditec) and Anterion (H, Heidelberg Engineering)) and evaluate the effect of measurement differences on the resulting lens power (IOLP).
Biometric measurements were made on a large study population with both instruments. We compared axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT) and corneal front and back surface curvature measurements. Corneal curvature was converted to power vectors and total power derived using the Gullstrand formula. A paraxial lens power calculation formula and a prediction for the IOL axial position according to the Castrop formula were used to estimate differences in IOLP targeting for emmetropia.
There were no systematic differences between measurements of AL (- 0.0146 ± 0.0286 mm) and LT (0.0383 ± 0.0595 mm), whereas CCT yielded lower (7.8 ± 6.6 µm) and ACD higher (0.1200 ± 0.0531 mm) values with H. With H, CCT was lower for thicker corneas. The mean corneal front surface radius did not differ (- 0.4 ± 41.6 µm), but the corneal back surface yielded a steeper radius (- 397.0 ± 74.6 µm) with H, giving lower mean total power (- 0.3469 ± 0.2689 dpt). The astigmatic vector components in 0°/90° and 45°/135° were the same between both instruments for the front/back surface or total power.
The biometric measures used in standard formulae (AL, corneal front surface curvature/power) are consistent between instruments. However, modern formulae involving ACD, CCT or corneal back surface curvature may yield differences in IOLP, and therefore, formula constant optimisation customised to the biometer type is required.
比较两种现代扫频源光相干断层扫描仪（IOLMaster700（Z，卡尔蔡司医学技术）和 Anterion（H，海德堡工程））的生物测量值，并评估测量差异对最终晶状体屈光力（IOLP）的影响。
使用两种仪器对大量研究人群进行生物测量。我们比较了眼轴长度（AL）、中央角膜厚度（CCT）、前房深度（ACD）、晶状体厚度（LT）和角膜前后面曲率测量值。角膜曲率转换为屈光力向量，使用古尔斯特兰德公式得出总屈光力。使用傍轴屈光力计算公式和根据卡斯特罗普公式预测的 IOL 轴向位置，估计用于近视矫正的 IOLP 目标的差异。
AL（-0.0146±0.0286mm）和 LT（0.0383±0.0595mm）的测量值之间没有系统差异，而 H 测量的 CCT 较低（7.8±6.6µm），ACD 较高（0.1200±0.0531mm）。对于较厚的角膜，H 测量的 CCT 较低。角膜前表面平均曲率半径没有差异（-0.4±41.6µm），但角膜后表面的曲率半径较陡（-397.0±74.6µm），导致平均总屈光力较低（-0.3469±0.2689 dpt）。前/后表面或总屈光力的 0°/90°和 45°/135°的散光向量分量在两种仪器之间相同。
标准公式中使用的生物测量值（AL、角膜前表面曲率/屈光力）在仪器之间是一致的。然而，涉及 ACD、CCT 或角膜后表面曲率的现代公式可能会导致 IOLP 差异，因此需要针对特定的生物测量仪类型进行公式常数优化。
