MP Weikert, M Shirayama, L Wang, DD Koch

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Toric and Modern IOL Technology
Advertisements

Corneal topography orbscan
Swept Source Optical Coherence Tomography for Evaluation of Posterior Corneal Changes after Refractive Surgery Dr. Tommy Chung Yan Chan Dr. Vishal Jhanji.
Comparison of corneal astigmatism measured with 3 devices Mariko Shirayama, M.D, Li Wang, M.D, PhD, Mitchell P. Weikert, M.D, Douglas D. Koch, M.D. Cullen.
A simple and accurate method of alignment for toric intraocular lens implantation using anterior segment optical coherence tomography (OCT). Kazuno Negishi,
Financial Disclosure I have a financial interest with the following companies: Abbott Medical Optics Alcon Calhoun Vision NuLens Optimedica Optivue  
IOL power calculation after refractive surgery A. Peyman, MD.
Outcome of refractive surgery in keratoconus suspect eyes
Repeatability of Anterior and Posterior Corneal Higher- Order Aberrations in 4 mm, 6 mm and 8 mm diameters measured by Pentacam System Jadwiga Wojtowicz.
Wavefront Sensing of the Human Eye
JAIRO E. HOYOS, MD MELANIA CIGALES, MD Instituto Oftalmológico Hoyos Barcelona - SPAIN.
G. Jacob 1,2, C. Bouchard 2, S. Kancherla 1. Edward Hines, Jr. VA Hospital, Hines, IL, Department of Ophthalmology 1. Loyola University Medical Center,
Hong Kong Eye Hospital Biometry Audit 2012 SN60WF IOL Dr. Rose Chan
Evaluation of Corneal Parameters and Spherical Aberration After DSAEK Measured with Pentacam System Orkun Muftuoglu, Pawan Prasher, R. Wayne Bowman, Steven.
Hong Kong Eye Hospital Ms Frenchy Chiu Dr Victoria Wong IOL master
Hong Kong Eye Hospital Biometry Audit 2011 SN60WF IOL Dr. Rose Chan Resident, Hong Kong Eye Hospital.
Biometric Accuracy in High Hypermetropes and Myopes
Evaluation of Zonal Equivalent Keratometry Readings After LASIK Timmy Kovoor, MD Orkun Muftuoglu, MD V.Vinod Mootha, MD Steven Verity, MD R. Wayne Bowman,
Corneal Topography using Orbscan : Basics and interpretation
ROTATING SCHEIMPFLUG TOPOGRAPHIC PARAMETERS IMPORTANT IN DISTINGUISHING NORMAL FROM KERATOCONIC CORNEAL MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES Clayton Falknor, MD, Orkun.
Using the ASCRS Post-Refractive Surgery IOL Calculator: A Retrospective Review Amit Patel MRCOphth, Achyut Mukherjee MRCOphth, Vinod Kumar FRCSEd(Ophth)
INTRAOCULAR LENS POWER CALCULATION BY IMMERSION A-SCAN BIOMETRY VERSUS CONTACT A-SCAN BIOMETRY MEASUREMENTS BEFORE CATARACT SURGERY Burak Bilgin**, M.D.,
Astigmatism management with toric intraocular lenses in cataract patients Adriano Guarnieri 1-2, Luis W. Lu 3-4, Alfonso Arias- Puente INCIVI, Madrid,
Sonia Yoo, MD 1 Fernanda Piccoli, MD 1 Artur Schmitt, MD 1 Takeshi Ide, MD 1 Tsontcho Ianchulev, MD 2 Authors have no financial interest in this subject.
Evaluation of refractive error measurements obtained by three different aberrometers Radha Ram, BA Li Wang, MD, PhD Mitchell P. Weikert, MD, MS Disclosure:
EVALUATION OF REFRACTIVE OUTCOMES AFTER IOL IMPLANTATION
The Effect of Corneal Anterior Surface Eccentricity on Astigmatism after Cataract Surgery Choul Yong Park MD 1 Sung Jun Lee MD 1 Prabjot Channa MD 2 Roy.
Evaluation of Corneal Tomography in Primary Pterygium Sahil Goel, MD (Presenting Author), Murugesan Vanathi MD *The authors have no financial interests.
Futoshi Taketani, MD,PhD,
Sherman W. Reeves, MD, MPH 1,3,4 ; Jacob A. Kozisek, OD 1,2 ; Noumia Cloutier-Gill, OD 1,2 ; David R. Hardten, MD 1,2,3,4 Accuracy of Scheimpflug Imaging.
Ocular functional optical zone following hyperopic LASIK/PRK: Analysis based on polychromatic retinal image quality Mitchell P. Weikert, MD Li Wang, MD,
Jae Lim Chung MD, MBA 1,3 ; Jin Pyo Hong MD 2,3 ; Kyoung Yul Seo MD, PhD 3 ; Eung Kweon Kim MD, PhD 3 ; Tae-im Kim MD, PhD Noo Ne Eye Hospital, Seoul,
Financial Disclosure: Medical Director–Galilei R&D Consultant, Ziemer Group AG, Port, Switzerland Consultant & Territory Manager for.
Comparison of Central Corneal Thickness, Anterior Chamber Depth, and Central Corneal Power Measurements between Two Scheimpflug Imaging Systems Yuichi.
Authors: Leonidas Traipe Magdalena Rios Edison Villagra Allister Gibbons Marcelo Hidalgo Claudia Goya Authors have no financial interest.
Post-LASIK Intraocular Lens Power Adjustment Nomogram Joseph Diehl Kevin Miller, MD Jules Stein Eye Institute, David Geffen School of Medicine.
Minimizing Risk in Visian ICL Implantation.
Toric IOLs: wavefront aberrometry and quality of life Mencucci Rita Giordano Cristina, Stiko Ermelinda, Miranda Paolo, Eleonora Favuzza, Ugo Menchini Authors.
Predicting Visual Acuity after Descemet’s Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty using Corneal Topography, Pachymetry and Posterior Curvature Asymmetry Indices.
0 Femtosecond-Laser Assisted Cataract Surgery: Is it living up to the hype? 117 th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Ophthalmology Press Briefing.
Intraocular Lens Outcomes: Comparison of Technologies and Formulas Carolina Eyecare Physicians, LLC Research Assistant Professor of Ophthalmology Storm.
Changes of Axial Length After LASIK Surgery: A 3-Year Follow-Up Study
Premium IOL May be one way to achieve the visual goals of selected patients I describe some pearls for premium IOL implantation to help ensure that we.
William W. Culbertson, MD Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, Miami, FL
Management of Corneal Astigmatism with Toric IOLs: Optimizing Outcomes
Date of download: 10/21/2017 Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
Corneal Pachymetry in Prediction of Refraction After Cataract Surgery
Toric Topographically Customized Transepithelial, Pulsed, Very High-Fluence, Higher Energy and Higher Riboflavin Concentration Collagen Cross-Linking in.
Refractive outcomes of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry versus optical biometry alone for intraocular lens power calculation Zina Zhang MD1, Logan.
The authors have no financial interest.
Comparison of Single-Scheimpflug and Dual-Scheimpflug Pachymetry Measurements and Effect of Decentration World Cornea Congress VI April 7-9, 2010.
Aug 11, 2017 Comparison of predictive accuracy on Partial coherence interferometry (PCI) and swpt-source optical coherence tomographry (SS-OCT) Choun-Ki.
Effect of Axial Length Measurement Method on Refractive Outcomes of Cataract Surgery: Real World Comparison of Partial Coherence Interferometry and Immersion.
Hôpital Ophtalmique Universitaire
Nienke Visser, Tos T.J.M. Berendschot, Rudy M.M.A. Nuijts
Early Experience with Descemet’s Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty Combined with Phacoemulsification: Clinical and Refractive Outcome University.
Comparison in Reduction of Preoperative Astigmatism after Cataract Surgery with Toric IOLs versus Limbal Relaxing Incisions Alexander Chop PhD MD (no.
Comparison of corneal powers obtained from four different devices
Carlos G. Arce, MD Associate Researcher and Ophthalmologist
Mohamed A Guenena, MD Helga P Sandoval, MD, MSCR Kerry D Solomon, MD
Is Photorefractive Keratectomy the Laser Vision Correction of Choice?
Sun Woong Kim, M.D.1, Hae Jung Sun, M.D.1,
IN THE NAME OF GOD.
Jonathan M. Davidorf, MD Los Angeles, CA ASCRS Annual Meeting
성모병원 안센터 CHANGES IN ASTIGMATISM RELATIVE TO IOL HAPTIC INSERTION AXIS IN WITH-THE-RULE AND AGAINST-THE-RULE ASTIGMATISM PATIENTS Hyun Seung Kim, M.D.
Factors Potentially Affecting the Accuracy of Methods to Calculate Effective Refractive Power After Keratorefractive Surgery Helga P Sandoval, MD, MSCR,
The authors have no financial interest
Refractive Surgery Outcomes: Corneas Thinner than 500 microns Vs
Effectiveness of Accuracy of Eye Trackers in Laser Refractive Surgery
Michael Goodman, Alexandra Paul and Andrew Hsu
Presentation transcript:

Posterior Corneal Power in IOL Calculations using the Galilei Dual Scheimpflug Analyzer MP Weikert, M Shirayama, L Wang, DD Koch American Society of Cataract & Refractive Surgery 2008 Annual Symposium April 5-8, 2008

Goals Determine the accuracy of IOL calculations with anterior & posterior corneal power measured by the Galilei Dual Scheimpflug Analyzer Compare IOL calculation accuracy w/ the Galilei to similar measurements with the Humphrey Atlas & IOL Master

Background The measurement of corneal refractive power is essential to the accurate calculation of IOL power in cataract surgery Current topographers utilize single technologies to calculate corneal power, such as Placido rings, Scheimpflug imaging, or slit beam scanning Placido devices produce accurate measures of corneal curvature but their measurements are confined to the anterior surface Scheimpflug and slit scanning devices can measure both the anterior and posterior corneal surfaces, but rely on elevation data that may lack sensitivity in the central cornea* *Roberts C. Corneal Topography in Refractive Surgery, 2nd Edition. Dmitri Azar (ed.). Stanford, CT: Appleton & Lange

Background Galilei Dual Scheimpflug Analyzer (DSA): 2 Technologies - Placido ring imaging Scheimpflug imaging May provide increased accuracy by combining - Anterior curvature data of Placido imaging with Anterior & posterior elevation data measured with a dual-camera Scheimpflug system

Methods Retrospective study Consecutive cataract surgeries at single center Preoperative corneal power by 5 methods: IOL Master – average of steep & flat axis Humphrey Atlas – average of steep & flat SimK Galilei DSA – Average of steep & flat SimK Average of steep & flat meridians for “total cornea power” (measured by ray tracing thru anterior & posterior surfaces) Average of “total corneal power” (TCP) over central zone with 4-mm diameter (measured by ray tracing also)

Methods Axial length measured w/ IOL Master IOL calculations performed with Holladay 1 formula Single model of IOL used (Alcon Acrysof SN60WF) Post-operative manifest refraction measured at 3 to 4 weeks following surgery Post-op MR spherical equivalent (SE) compared to predicted refractive target for implanted IOL

Methods Surgeon factor (SF) optimized for each method of measuring corneal power Outcome measures: Average corneal power for each method Absolute error b/w predicted target and post-op MRSE Statistical analysis: SPSS software Analysis of variance

Results - Corneal Power Range vs. Average Corneal Power In comparing the corneal powers measured w/ each device/method, no correlation was found with the average corneal power (i.e. the devices did not agree more at flatter or steeper curvatures)

Results – Optimized Surgeon Factor & Absolute Prediction Error Corneal Power Measurement Optimized Surgeon Factor Absolute Prediction Error (D)* ± SD Galilei SimK 1.67 0.43 ± 0.34 (0.03 – 1.58) Galilei TCP Avg 1.50 0.45 ± 0.36 (0.04 – 1.61) Galilei TCP Central Avg 1.70 0.46 ± 0.36 (0.02 – 1.71) IOL Master 1.73 0.40 ± 0.29 (0.05 – 1.06) Atlas SimK 1.79 0.51 ± 0.34 (0.05 – 1.38) * No statistically significant differences b/w absolute prediction errors

Results - Absolute Prediction Error

Discussion Agreement between devices w.r.t. corneal power was independent of average corneal power All methods for measuring corneal power produced similar results for IOL calculations: Absolute error ranged from 0.40 to 0.51 D Std. dev. ranged from 0.29 to 0.36 D Galilei SimK’s had the largest percentage of eyes w/ PE’s ≤ 0.5 D All corneal power methods had 90% of eyes w/ PE’s ≤ 1.0 D

Conclusions IOL calculations using corneal power measured with the Galilei DSA had accuracies comparable to the IOL Master Total corneal power (TCP) determined by ray tracing through the anterior and posterior cornea produced accurate IOL calculations This may have significant benefit in post-LASIK or PRK eyes where the relationship between the anterior and posterior cornea is altered More eyes are needed to increase the study power