Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Comparison of 2 A-scans.

Sverker Norrby1, Eva Lydahl, Gabor Koranyi

  • 1Pharmacia, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery
|January 29, 2003
PubMed
Summary

Two A-scan ultrasound devices showed significant differences in measuring axial length and anterior chamber depth, impacting intraocular lens calculations. Standardization is needed for accurate cataract surgery planning.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Sources of Error in Toric Intraocular Lens Power Calculation.

Journal of refractive surgery (Thorofare, N.J. : 1995)·2020
Same author

Prediction of the true IOL position.

The British journal of ophthalmology·2017
Same author

Using continuous intraoperative optical coherence tomography measurements of the aphakic eye for intraocular lens power calculation.

The British journal of ophthalmology·2014
Same author

Reply: To PMID 22709831.

American journal of ophthalmology·2012
Same author

Fluctuations in corneal curvature limit predictability of intraocular lens power calculations.

Journal of cataract and refractive surgery·2012
Same author

The final frontier: pediatric intraocular lens power.

American journal of ophthalmology·2012

Area of Science:

  • Ophthalmology
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Medical Instrumentation

Background:

  • Accurate biometry is crucial for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in cataract surgery.
  • Variations in A-scan biometry measurements can lead to refractive surprises post-surgery.
  • Evaluating different A-scan devices is essential for understanding measurement discrepancies.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare measurement differences between two A-scan instruments (BVI Axis and Sonomed 1500).
  • To assess systematic errors and random errors in axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD), and lens thickness (LT) measurements.
  • To determine the clinical impact of these differences on IOL power calculation.

Main Methods:

  • 148 patients undergoing cataract surgery were measured using both BVI Axis and Sonomed 1500 A-scan devices.
  • Analysis focused on systematic differences and random errors for AL, ACD, and LT.
  • Correlation coefficients and standard deviations were calculated to quantify measurement variability.

Main Results:

  • Sonomed 1500 systematically overestimated AL (0.41 mm) and ACD (0.28 mm) compared to BVI Axis.
  • AL and ACD showed good correlation (r=0.99 and r=0.87), but LT correlated poorly (r=0.18).
  • Random errors were significantly higher for ACD (7.2%) and LT (18.6%) than for AL (0.8%). The AL difference equates to a 1.0 diopter A-constant shift.

Conclusions:

  • Large random errors in ACD and LT limit their predictive value for IOL position.
  • Systematic differences in AL measurements necessitate separate A-constants for different devices.
  • Standardization and universal calibration of A-scan instruments are recommended to prevent errors and improve surgical outcomes.

Related Experiment Videos