| Comparative Analysis of Corneal Refraction and Astigmatism Measured with Autokeratometer, IOL Master, and Topography. |
|
Jeong Mo Han, Hyuk Jin Choi, Mee Kum Kim, Won Ryang Wee, Jin Hak Lee |
1Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. kmk9@snu.ac.kr
2Laboratory of Corneal Regenerative Medicine and Ocular Immunology, Seoul Artificial Eye Center, Seoul National University Hospital Clinical Research Institute, Seoul, Korea.
3Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea. |
| 자동각막굴절계, IOL Master, 각막지형도의 각막굴절력 및 각막난시 측정의 비교 분석 |
|
한정모1,2⋅최혁진1,2⋅김미금1,2⋅위원량1,2⋅이진학1,3 |
|
Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University College of Medicine1, Seoul, Korea Laboratory of Corneal Regenerative Medicine and Ocular Immunology, Seoul Artificial Eye Center, Seoul National University Hospital Clinical Research Institute2, Seoul, Korea Seoul National University Bundang Hospital3, Seongnam, Korea |
|
|
| Abstract |
PURPOSE
To comparatively analyze the repeatability and consistency between different methods of measuring corneal refraction and astigmatism in order to precisely determine the toric intraocular lens target. METHODS: The medical records of 254 eyes of 192 persons were retrospectively reviewed to compare the repeatability of corneal refraction measured with autokeratometer, IOL Master, and topography. The axis and the amount of the astigmatism were compared between these methods. The differences between the estimated spherical equivalents using measured corneal refractive values and the actual spherical equivalents after cataract surgery were compared to evaluate the expected astigmatic error of each measurement. RESULTS: The average corneal refraction was greater with topography than with IOL Master or autokeratometer. Astigmatism calculated with IOL Master was greater than that measured with topography or autokeratometer. The mean coefficient of variation for mean corneal refraction was 0.19% with autokeratometer, which was smaller than that with IOL Master or topography. In patients with more than 1.5D of astigmatism, there were no significant differences in the axis measured by each instrument. The expected spherical error in IOL calculation was smaller with the measured values from IOL Master and autokeratometer than were those with topography. CONCLUSIONS: The repeatability of measurements for corneal refraction and astigmatism was significantly higher using the autokeratometer and IOL Master, with the highest astigmatic value observed with the IOL master. The axis of astigmatism for each method was consistent in the patients with more than 1.5D of astigmatism. |
| Key Words:
Autokeratometer;Astigmatism;IOL Master;Refraction;Topography |
|
PDF Links
Full text via DOI
Download Citation
