Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 15, 2025

In vivo Structural Assessments of Ocular Disease in Rodent Models using Optical Coherence Tomography
Published on: July 24, 2020
Accuracy comparison of tomography devices for ray tracing-based intraocular lens calculation
Felix M Wagner1, Peter Hoffmann, Paul-Rolf Preußner
1From the Department of Ophthalmology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Mainz, Germany (Wagner, Preußner); Augen- & Laserklinik Castrop Rauxel GmbH, Castrop-Rauxel, Germany (Hoffmann).
Purpose:
To evaluate the interchangeability of different tomography devices used for ray tracing-based intraocular lens (IOL) calculation.
Setting:
Eye clinic, Castrop-Rauxel, Germany.
Design:
Retrospective analysis.
Method:
Measurements from 3 Placido-Scheimpflug devices and 3 optical coherence tomography (OCT) devices were compared in 83 and 161 other eyes after cataract surgery, respectively. 2-dimensional matrices of anterior local corneal curvature and local corneal thickness are transferred to the ray-tracing software OKULIX. Calculations are performed with the same IOL in the same position of an eye with the same axial length. Differences in spherical equivalent (SE), astigmatism, and spherical aberration are evaluated. Furthermore, the influence of the size of the matrices (optical zone) on the accuracy is quantified.
Results:
For the Placido-Scheimpflug devices, the deviations from the average of three measurements taken for each eye in SE (mean ± SD) were 0.17 ± 0.24 diopters (D), -0.26 ± 0.29 D, and 0.08 ± 0.39 D ( P < .001, analysis of variance [ANOVA]), for the centroids of the astigmatic differences 0.04 D/173 degrees, 0.14 D/93 degrees, and 0.10 D/7 degrees, and for the median of the absolute values of the vector differences 0.31 D, 0.33 D, and 0.29 D. For OCT devices, the corresponding results were 0.01 ± 0.21 D, -0.03 ± 0.21 D, and 0.02 ± 0.20 D ( P = .005, ANOVA); 0.18 D/120 degrees, 0.07 D/70 degrees, and 0.22 D/4 degrees; and 0.26 D, 0.30 D, and 0.33 D. The accuracy of the calculated spherical aberrations allows for an individual selection of the best fitting IOL model in most cases.
Conclusions:
The differences are small enough to make the devices interchangeable regarding astigmatism and spherical aberration. Although there are significant differences in SE between Scheimpflug and OCT devices, the differences between OCT devices are also small enough to make them interchangeable, but the differences between Placido-Scheimpflug devices are too large to make these devices interchangeable.
More Related Videos
06:55Scanning Light Scattering Profiler SLPS Based Methodology to Quantitatively Evaluate Forward and Backward Light Scattering from Intraocular Lenses
Published on: June 6, 2017
12:22Multimodal Volumetric Retinal Imaging by Oblique Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopy oSLO and Optical Coherence Tomography OCT
Published on: August 4, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Computed Tomography
The technique was invented in the 1970s and is based on the principle that as X-rays pass through the body, they are absorbed or reflected at different levels. In the technique, a patient lies on a motorized platform while a computerized axial tomography (CAT) scanner rotates...
Imaging Studies III: Computed Tomography