{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,3]],"date-time":"2026-08-03T10:44:22Z","timestamp":1785753862136,"version":"3.56.0"},"reference-count":14,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,3]],"date-time":"2026-08-03T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1785715200000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,3]],"date-time":"2026-08-03T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1785715200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100001794","name":"The University of Queensland","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100001794","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"crossref"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Purpose<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      To compare the predicted spherical equivalent (PSEq) between the ANTERION\n                      <jats:sup>\u00ae<\/jats:sup>\n                      anterior segment OCT device (Heidelberg Engineering GmbH, Heidelberg, Germany) and the IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany) in patient undergoing cataract surgery.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Ocular biometry was performed by a single investigator for each patient scheduled for cataract surgery, with ANTERION and IOLMaster 700. Intraocular lens (IOL) power for TECNIS\n                      <jats:sup>\u00ae<\/jats:sup>\n                      1-Piece Aspheric IOL (Model ZCB00) and corresponding PSEq were calculated using IOL formulas including Barrett Universal II, Cooke K6, EVO 2.0, Hill-RBF 3.0, Hoffer\n                      <jats:sup>\u00ae<\/jats:sup>\n                      QST, Kane, Pearl-DGS and SRK\/T. The main outcomes assessed were the mean difference in PSEq between the two devices and the proportion of eyes where the PSEq difference exceeded 0.35 dioptres (D), considered clinically significant as it would likely result in a different IOL power being implanted.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      A total of 155 right eyes from 155 patients were analysed. The ANTERION consistently produced more hyperopic PSEq compared to the IOLMaster, with mean differences across all IOL formulas ranging from +\u20090.11 to +\u20090.18 D. These differences were statistically significant (\n                      <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.05). Agreement analysis demonstrated that the majority of data points between the devices were within the 95% limits of agreement (\u2212\u20090.39 D to 0.79 D), regardless of the IOL power calculation formula applied. However, 15\u201325% of eyes showed a PSEq difference greater than 0.35 D.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>PSEq derived from ANTERION is slightly hyperopic compared to IOLMaster, with discrepancies significant enough to affect IOL power selection in up to 25% of eyes.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s00417-026-07411-0","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,3]],"date-time":"2026-08-03T09:45:29Z","timestamp":1785750329000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["A comparative analysis of predicted spherical refractive outcomes between two swept-source optical biometers"],"prefix":"10.1007","author":[{"given":"Samir","family":"Uprety","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Cameron","family":"McLintock","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Saran","family":"Takemura","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"James","family":"McKelvie","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,3]]},"reference":[{"key":"7411_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"249","DOI":"10.3928\/1081597X-20230131-01","volume":"39","author":"OV Voytsekhivskyy","year":"2023","unstructured":"Voytsekhivskyy OV, Hoffer KJ, Tutchenko L et al (2023) Accuracy of 24 IOL Power Calculation Methods. J Refract Surg 39:249\u2013256. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3928\/1081597X-20230131-01","journal-title":"J Refract Surg"},{"key":"7411_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"ee0251152","DOI":"10.1371\/JOURNAL.PONE.0251152","volume":"16","author":"MY Song","year":"2021","unstructured":"Song MY, Noh SR, Kim KY (2021) Refractive prediction of four different intraocular lens calculation formulas compared between new swept source optical coherence tomography and partial coherence interferometry. PLoS ONE 16:ee0251152. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/JOURNAL.PONE.0251152","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"key":"7411_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1594","DOI":"10.4103\/ijo.IJO_2433_21","volume":"70","author":"A Panda","year":"2022","unstructured":"Panda A, Nanda A, Sahoo K (2022) Comparison of ocular biometry and refractive outcome between ANTERION and IOL Master 700. Indian J Ophthalmol 70:1594\u20131598","journal-title":"Indian J Ophthalmol"},{"key":"7411_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Cheng S-M, Li X, Zhang J-S et al (2023) Comparison of Refractive Prediction Accuracy With Three Optical Devices. J Refract Surg, 39(1), 48\u201355 https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3928\/1081597X-20221115-02","DOI":"10.3928\/1081597X-20221115-02"},{"key":"7411_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"535","DOI":"10.1097\/J.JCRS.0000000000000788","volume":"48","author":"OA Pfaeffli","year":"2022","unstructured":"Pfaeffli OA, Weber A, Hoffer KJ et al (2022) Agreement of intraocular lens power calculation between 2 SS-OCT-based biometers. J Cataract Refract Surg 48:535\u2013541. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/J.JCRS.0000000000000788","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"7411_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"429","DOI":"10.1097\/j.jcrs.0000000000000781","volume":"48","author":"Y Kato","year":"2022","unstructured":"Kato Y, Kojima T, Tamaoki A et al (2022) Refractive prediction error in cataract surgery using an optical biometer equipped with anterior segment OCT. J Cataract Refract Surg 48:429\u2013434","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"7411_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Norrby S (2008) Sources of error in intraocular lens power calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg 34. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jcrs.2007.10.031","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jcrs.2007.10.031"},{"key":"7411_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"488","DOI":"10.1097\/j.jcrs.0000000000001633","volume":"51","author":"D Gatinel","year":"2025","unstructured":"Gatinel D, Debellemani\u00e8re G, Saad A, Malet J (2025) Relationship between intraocular lens power and ocular refraction variations. J Cataract Refract Surg 51:488\u2013495. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/j.jcrs.0000000000001633","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"7411_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1107","DOI":"10.1097\/j.jcrs.0000000000000942","volume":"48","author":"C Mclintock","year":"2022","unstructured":"Mclintock C, Niyazmand H, Seo S et al (2022) Agreement between 2 SS-OCT biometry devices. J Cataract Refract Surg 48:1107\u20131112. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/j.jcrs.0000000000000942","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"7411_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"999","DOI":"10.1007\/s00417-022-05870-9","volume":"261","author":"A Langenbucher","year":"2023","unstructured":"Langenbucher A, Szentm\u00e1ry N, Cayless A et al (2023) Comparison of 2 modern swept-source optical biometers\u2014IOLMaster 700 and Anterion. Graefe\u2019s Archive Clin Experimental Ophthalmol 261:999\u20131010. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00417-022-05870-9","journal-title":"Graefe\u2019s Archive Clin Experimental Ophthalmol"},{"key":"7411_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"87","DOI":"10.1097\/j.jcrs.0000000000000373","volume":"47","author":"AD Fi\u015fu\u015f","year":"2021","unstructured":"Fi\u015fu\u015f AD, Hirnschall ND, Findl O (2021) Comparison of 2 swept-source optical coherence tomography\u2013based biometry devices. J Cataract Refract Surg 47:87\u201392","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"7411_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1186\/S12886-021-01826-5","volume":"21","author":"R Oh","year":"2021","unstructured":"Oh R, Oh JY, Choi HJ et al (2021) Comparison of ocular biometric measurements in patients with cataract using three swept-source optical coherence tomography devices. BMC Ophthalmol 21:1\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/S12886-021-01826-5","journal-title":"BMC Ophthalmol"},{"key":"7411_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"488","DOI":"10.1097\/j.jcrs.0000000000000483","volume":"47","author":"P Ta\u00f1\u00e1-Rivero","year":"2021","unstructured":"Ta\u00f1\u00e1-Rivero P, Aguilar-C\u00f3rcoles S, Tello-Elordi C et al (2021) Agreement between 2 swept-source OCT biometers and a Scheimpflug partial coherence interferometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 47:488\u2013495","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"7411_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Xu J, Li C, Wang L et al (2020) Influence of measurement differences of anterior chamber depth and axial length on lens thickness evaluation in cataract patients: a comparison of two tests. BMC Ophthalmol 20. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12886-020-01754-w","DOI":"10.1186\/s12886-020-01754-w"}],"container-title":["Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00417-026-07411-0.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00417-026-07411-0","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00417-026-07411-0.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,3]],"date-time":"2026-08-03T09:45:30Z","timestamp":1785750330000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00417-026-07411-0"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,3]]},"references-count":14,"alternative-id":["7411"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00417-026-07411-0","relation":{},"ISSN":["0721-832X","1435-702X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0721-832X","type":"print"},{"value":"1435-702X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,3]]},"assertion":[{"value":"18 May 2026","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"29 June 2026","order":2,"name":"revised","label":"Revised","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"19 July 2026","order":3,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"3 August 2026","order":4,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"The authors declare no competing interests.","order":1,"name":"Ethics","label":"Competing interests","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"The authors declare no conflict of interests.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","label":"Conflict of interest","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"The study protocol received approval from the Metro South Human Research Ethics Committee (approval number: LNR\/2019\/QMS\/60356) and adhered to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}}]}}