Advance Search
QU Bo, LIU Danxia, ZHANG Wang, QIN Yu, HUANG Ting, LU Lu. Comparison of IOL master 700 and Lenstar for measurement of axial lengths[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2019, 23(12): 19-22. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201912006
Citation: QU Bo, LIU Danxia, ZHANG Wang, QIN Yu, HUANG Ting, LU Lu. Comparison of IOL master 700 and Lenstar for measurement of axial lengths[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2019, 23(12): 19-22. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201912006
shu

Comparison of IOL master 700 and Lenstar for measurement of axial lengths

  • 1.

    The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Ophthalmology Hospital of China Medical University, Key Laboratory for Crystalline Lens of Liaoning Province, Shenyang, Liaoning, 110001

  • 2.

    Chongqing Aier Eye Hospital, Chongqing, 400060

More Information
  • Received Date: March 20, 2019
  • Accepted Date: April 22, 2019
  • Available Online: February 22, 2021
  • Published Date: June 27, 2019
    Graphical Abstract
    • Abstract
  •   Objective  To compare the differences, correlation, and consistency of results in measurement of axial lengths(AL) by Lenstar and IOL master 700.
      Methods  In this cross-sectional study, a total of 94 patients(94 eyes) between May and July 2018 from Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University and Ophthalmology Hospital of China Medical University were selected as research objects, and each patient performed Lenstar, IOL master 700 in sequence to measure the AL. The difference, correlation, and consistency of the two instruments were compared. They are random analysis of variance, Pearson correlative analysis, and Bland-Altman analysis respectively.
      Results  Lenstar and IOL master 700 had no statistically significance in the differences in AL measurement(P>0.05), but has a higher correlation and good consistency.
      Conclusion  The two methods have higher correlation and consistency in the AL measurements, and can be interchangeable.
    • FullText(HTML)
    • References (15)
  • [1]
    Foster P J, Buhrmann R, Quigley H A, et al. The definition and classification of glaucoma in prevalence surveys[J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 2002, 86(2): 238-242. doi: 10.1136/bjo.86.2.238
    [2]
    Thomas R, George R, Parikh R, et al. Five year risk of progression of primary angle closure suspects to primary angle closure: a population based study[J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 2003, 87(4): 450-454. doi: 10.1136/bjo.87.4.450
    [3]
    Thomas R, Parikh R, Muliyil J, et al. Five-year risk of progression of primary angle closure to primary angle closure glaucoma: a population-based study[J]. Acta Ophthalmol Scand, 2003, 81(5): 480-485. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0420.2003.00135.x
    [4]
    Wang L H, Huang W Y, Huang S S, et al. Ten-year incidence of primary angle closure in elderly Chinese: the Liwan Eye Study[J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 2019, 103(3): 355-360. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-311808
    [5]
    严良, 李雯. 闭角型青光眼房角关闭机制研究现状[J]. 中国实用眼科杂志, 2013, 31(6): 653-656. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1006-4443.2013.06.001
    [6]
    Lowe R F. Aetiology of the anatomical basis for primary angle-closure glaucoma. Biometrical comparisons between normal eyes and eyes with primary angle-closure glaucoma[J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 1970, 54(3): 161-169. doi: 10.1136/bjo.54.3.161
    [7]
    Markowitz S N, Donald Morin J. The ratio of lens thickness to axial length for biometric standardization in angle-closure glaucoma[J]. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 1985, 99(4): 400-402. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(85)90005-4
    [8]
    Shammas H J, Hoffer K J. Repeatability and reproducibility of biometry and keratometry measurements using a noncontact optical low-coherence reflectometer and keratometer[J]. Am J Ophthalmol, 2012, 153(1): 55-61. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2011.06.012
    [9]
    Koktekir B E, Gedik S, Bakbak B. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with optical low-coherence reflectometry and ultrasound pachymetry and reproducibility of both devices[J]. Cornea, 2012, 31(11): 1278-1281. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e31823f7701
    [10]
    Buckhurst J, Wolffsohn S, Shah S, et al. A new optical low coherence reflectometry device for ocular biometry in cataract patients[J]. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 2009, 93(7): 949-953. http://bjo.bmj.com/content/93/7/949.abstract
    [11]
    Chen Y A, Hirnschall N, Findl O. Evaluation of 2 new optical biometry devices and comparison with the current gold standard biometer[J]. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2011, 37(3): 513-517. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.10.041
    [12]
    Akman A, Asena L, Güngör S G. Evaluation and comparison of the new swept source OCT-based IOLMaster 700 with the IOLMaster 500[J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 2016, 100(9): 1201-1205. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307779
    [13]
    Kurian M, Negalur N, Das S, et al. Biometry with a new swept-source optical coherence tomography biometer: Repeatability and agreement with an optical low-coherence reflectometry device[J]. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2016, 42(4): 577-581. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.01.038
    [14]
    Srivannaboon S, Chirapapaisan C, Chonpimai P, Loket S. Clinical comparison of a new swept-source optical coherence tomography-based optical biometer and a time-domain optical coherence tomography-based optical biometer[J]. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2015, 41(10): 2224-2232. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0886335015011153
    [15]
    Azuara-Blanco A, Burr J, Ramsay C, et al. Effectiveness of early lens extraction for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma (EAGLE): a randomised controlled trial[J]. Lancet, 2016, 388(10052): 1389-1397.
    • Related Articles

  • Cited by

    Periodical cited type(10)

    1. 顾雅秋，沈丹. 人性化护理在外科手术室护理中的效果分析. 名医. 2023(14): 81-83 .
    2. 王静，孙静，王艳芳. 磁性医院管理理念在心血管外科手术室护理管理中的应用. 中华现代护理杂志. 2022(03): 387-391 .
    3. 王婷婷，冯文娟. 基于思维导图的无缝隙干预模式在泌尿外科手术室护理中的应用效果及对护理满意度的影响. 临床医学研究与实践. 2022(11): 177-180+184 .
    4. 曹江涛. 个性化护理服务在手术室患者中的应用. 保健医学研究与实践. 2021(S1): 202-204 .
    5. 张媛媛. 人性化护理模式在手术室护理中的应用价值评价. 中国继续医学教育. 2020(06): 181-183 .
    6. 王前前，胡亚平，张林波. 手术室整体护理对甲状腺手术患者的影响研究. 现代医药卫生. 2020(14): 2267-2269 .
    7. 冯雪玉. 手术室护理干预对结石性胆囊炎合并糖尿病患者的临床价值. 糖尿病新世界. 2020(19): 9-11 .
    8. 李瑾. 手术室人性化护理服务实施的应用效果分析. 山西医药杂志. 2020(24): 3519-3521 .
    9. 程宝玉. 舒适性护理应用于老年肺癌患者术中护理效果分析. 现代医学. 2019(12): 1544-1547 .
    10. 滕文久. 心理护理在手术室患者中的应用效果. 中国民康医学. 2019(23): 151-153 .

    Other cited types(0)

Catalog

    Get Citation
    PDF
    XML
    Article views (443) PDF downloads (26) Cited by(10)
    Turn off MathJax
    Article Contents
    Abstract
    References

    © 2020 《实用临床医药杂志》编辑部

    Address: 江苏省扬州市江阳中路136号，扬州大学江阳路北校区14号楼201室China Pos: 225009Tel: 0514-87978917、87978989、87978807

    苏公网安备 32100302010246号

    Supported by: Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co., Ltd.   Baidu Analytics

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return