Comparison of tendency and accuracy in predicted postoperative refraction and recommended IOL (intraocular lens) power between IOLMaster and Verion

Session Details

Session Title: Presented Poster Session: Toric Lenses & IOL Power Calculation

Venue: Poster Village: Pod 1

First Author: : T.Teshigawara JAPAN

Co Author(s): :    A. Meguro   N. Mizuki                    

Abstract Details

Purpose:

VERION (Alcon) has a characteristic that it measures K-value in the more central part of cornea than IOL Master (Zeiss), and its official IOL-constant hasn’t been released. Differences in predicted postoperative refraction (PPR), recommended IOL power (RIP) and K-value between both biometers are often remarkable. In this study, we evaluated mean refractive shift (MRS) and mean absolute error (MAE) of PPR, RIP, and K-value in both biometers. We also assessed the necessity of optimization of IOL-constant in VERION.

Setting:

Yokohama Tsurumi Chuoh Eye Clinic and Yokosuka Chuoh Eye Clinic, Kanagawa, Japan

Methods:

Study used 72 eyes. K-value was measured by each biometer. Axial length and anterior chamber depth measured by IOL Master were applied to VERION, which cannot measure these variables. The ULIB optimized IOL-constant for IOL Master was also applied to VERION before IOL-constant optimization since there was no official IOL-constant for VERION. We compared MRS and MAE of PPR, RIP and K-value in IOL Master with those in VERION before and after IOL-constant optimization using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Additionally, we assessed the correlations between K-value and the other three parameters in VERION using Spearman's rank-order correlation test.

Results:

K-value was significantly higher in VERION than in IOL Master. Before IOL-constant optimization in VERION, VERION showed significantly more myopic shift in MRS of PPR than IOL Master, and MAE of PPR in VERION was significantly higher than that in IOL Master. Additionally, before the optimization, VERION showed significantly lower RIP than IOL Master. After the optimization, there was no significant difference in MRS of PPR and RIP between both biometers, and MAE of PPR in IOL Master was significantly higher than that in VERION. In VERION, K-value showed no correlations with MRS and MAE of PPR and RIP.

Conclusions:

The current study found that VERION was less reliable in MRS and MAE of PPR, and RIP than IOL Master before the IOL-constant optimization. However, the IOL-constant optimization significantly improved the accuracy of PPR and RIP calculated by VERION and the accuracy of PPR in VERION became significantly higher than that in IOL-Master. Our findings suggest that the IOL-constant optimization is essential in use of VERION.

Financial Disclosure:

None