Czech and Slovak Ophthalmology 337 10.31348/2024/35 Original article Comparison of Optical Biometry Data Measured with Lenstar and Anterion Devices Anwarzai Šulavíková Zuzana https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4213-9479 Palková Nina 25 8 2024 6 4

Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the results of preoperative biometric data measured with optical biometers of different generations in patients with cataract. Lenstar optical biometry is based on the principle of optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR), and Anterion on swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT). Material and methods: A total of 200 eyes (103 patients) were included in a prospective study at the Faculty Hospital in Trenčín the period from June 2023 to January 2024. We compared the results of 6 parameters: axial length (AL), mean keratometry (K), lens thickness (LT), white-to-white diameter (WTW), astigmatism (AST), and intraocular lens (IOL) power. The results were statistically analyzed. Results: The values of AL, AST, and IOL parameters between the Lenstar and Anterion biometers were consistent, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.593; p = 0.089; p = 0.069). The values of K, LT, and WTW showed statistically significant differences (p < 0.001). A Bland-Altman plot analysis confirmed good concordance between the parameters within a 95% limit of agreement. Conclusion: Biometric data measurement using SS-OCT Anterion is reliable, quick, and the results are comparable to those obtained with Lenstar. The AL, AST, and estimated IOL values were consistent between the biometers. Despite differences in the measurements of LT, WTW, and K parameters, the final IOL value was the same. In addition to biometric data, Anterion provides comprehensive tomographic examination of the cornea and OCT scanning of the anterior segment.

 optical biometry cataract Lenstar Anterion biometry comparison References Davis G. The evolution of cataract surgery. Mo Med. 2016;113(1):58-62. Jaycock P, Johnston RL, Taylor H, et al. The cataract national dataset electronic multi-centre audit of 55,567 operations: updating benchmark standards of care in the United Kingdom and internationally. Eye. 2009;23(1):38-49. doi:10.1038/ sj.eye.6703015 Holladay JT. Standardizing constants for ultrasonic biometry, keratometry, and intraocular lens power calculations. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1997;23(9):1356-1370. doi: 10.1016/s0886- 3350(97)80115-010.1016/s0886- Buckhurst PJ, Wolffsohn JS, Shah S, Naroo SA, Davies LN, Berrow EJ. A new optical low coherence reflectometry device for ocular biometry in cataract patients. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009;93(7):949-953. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2008.15655410.1136/bjo.2008.156554 Epitropoulos A. Axial length measurement acquisition rates of two optical biometers in cataractous eyes. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014;8:1369-1376. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S6265310.2147/OPTH.S62653 Epitropoulos AT, Matossian C, Berdy GJ, Malhotra RP, Potvin R. Effect of tear osmolarity on repeatability of keratometry for cataract surgery planning. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015;41(8):1672-1677. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.01.01610.1016/j.jcrs.2015.01.016 Kim KY, Choi GS, Kang MS, Kim US. Comparison study of the axial length measured using the new swept-source optical coherence tomography ANTERION and the partial coherence interferometry IOL Master. PLoS One. 2020;15(12):e0244590. doi: 10.1371/journal. pone.024459010.1371/journal Fişuş AD, Hirnschall ND, Findl O. Comparison of 2 swept-source optical coherence tomography-based biometry devices. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2021;47(1):87-92. doi: 10.1097/j.jcrs.000000000000037310.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000373 Chen S, Gao R, McAlinden C, et al. Comparison of Anterior Ocular Biometric Measurements Using Swept-Source and Time-Domain Optical Coherence Tomography. J Ophthalmol. 2020:9739878. doi: 10.1155/2020/973987810.1155/2020/9739878 Autrata D, Chrapek O, Drahorád S. Effect of pharmacological pupil dilation on intraocular lens power calculation in patients indicated for cataract surgery. Cesk Slov Oftalmol. 2021;77(4):192-200. doi: 10.31348/2021/2210.31348/2021/22 Arriola-Villalobos P, Díaz-Valle D, Garzòn N et al. Effect of pharmacologic pupil dilation on OLCR optical biometry measurements for IOL predictions. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2014;24(1):53-7. doi: 10.5301/ ejo.5000332 Borgia A, Raimondi R, Sorrentino T et al. Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography-Based Biometry: A Comprehensive Overview. Photonics. 2022; 9(12):951. doi: 10.3390/photonics912095110.3390/photonics9120951 Montés-Micó R. Evaluation of 6 biometers based on different optical technologies. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2022;48(1):16-25. doi: 10.1097/j.jcrs.000000000000069010.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000690 Hashemi H, Khabazkhoob M, Emamian MH, Shariati M, Yekta A, Fotouhi A. White-to-white corneal diameter distribution in an adult population. J Curr Ophthalmol. 2015;27(1-2):21-24. doi: 10.1016/j. joco.2015.09.00110.1016/j Gjerdrum B, Gundersen KG, Nilsen C, Gundersen M, Jensen P. Refractive Predictability and Biometry Agreement of a Combined Swept Source Optical Coherence and Reflectometry Biometer Compared to an Optical Low Coherence Reflectometry Biometer and an SS-OCT Biometer. Clin Ophthalmol. 2023;17:1439-1452. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S40868510.2147/OPTH.S408685 Alnahrawy A, Niestrata M, Bazeer S et al. Comparison of biometry measurements using Anterion and Lenstar biometers. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2022;63(7):2891 – F0028. Cheng SM, Zhang JS, Shao X et al. Repeatability of a new sweptsource optical coherence tomographer and agreement with other three optical biometers. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2022;260(7):2271-2281. doi: 10.1007/s00417-022-05579-910.1007/s00417-022-05579-9