Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 5, 2025
Multimodal Volumetric Retinal Imaging by Oblique Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopy oSLO and Optical Coherence Tomography OCT
Published on: August 4, 2018
Comparison of Ocular Biometry Measurements from Two Swept-Source OCT Devices: Eyestar 900 vs. Anterion
Julian V Kool van Langenberghe1, Petra Schwarzer2, Tobias Jahn3
1Clinical Affairs & Clinical Operations, Haag-Streit AG, Köniz, Switzerland.
Background:
Advanced swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) devices are the current gold standard for the measurement of ocular biometric and keratometric parameters, which are essential for the calculation and selection of intraocular lenses (IOLs). This study compares the agreement of two SS-OCT devices, the Eyestar 900 (Haag-Streit, Köniz, Switzerland) and the Anterion (Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany).
Materials And Methods:
All patients undergoing cataract surgery or seeking consultation for corneal abnormalities between January 2024 and May 2024 were eligible for inclusion. Both eyes were included in the final analysis.
Results:
A sample of 86 eyes from 43 patients was analysed. The mean differences (ES-AN) across all data between the Eyestar 900 (ES) and Anterion (AN) were as follows: anterior chamber depth (ACD) - 0.080 mm (ICC > 0.926), axial length (AL) 0.015 mm (ICC > 0.99), central corneal thickness (CCT) 0.914 µm (ICC > 0.921), corneal curvature along the flat meridian (K1) - 0.024 D (ICC > 0.904), and steep meridian (K2) - 0.210 D (ICC > 0.902), white-to-white corneal diameter (WTW) 0.215 mm (ICC > 0.81). There was excellent agreement for ACD, AL, CCT, K1, K2, and WTW. However, the corneal axis (AX) showed only moderate agreement (ICC > 0.389), with a mean difference of 5.97° and a notable standard deviation of 58.6°.
Conclusions:
The Eyestar 900 and Anterion demonstrated substantial agreement for all parameters except for the corneal meridian axis. It may be assumed that the inclusion of eyes with irregular corneal topographies may have contributed to this discrepancy.
Summary:
Overall, there was a high level of agreement between the Eyestar 900 and Anterion. It is reasonable to assume that the measurement outcomes provided by both devices are interchangeable for the calculation of target refractive outcomes for intraocular lenses, with no clinically relevant differences.
