{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,26]],"date-time":"2026-08-26T19:27:51Z","timestamp":1787772471681,"version":"build-2784847793"},"reference-count":24,"publisher":"Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)","issue":"1","content-domain":{"domain":["lww.com","ovid.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2023,1]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Purpose:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To compare the intraocular lens (IOLs) power calculated with Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK\/T formulas between the IOLs Master 500 and Pentacam AXL according to the lens status.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>In this cross-sectional study, sampling was done in subjects above 60 years living in Tehran using multi-stage cluster sampling. All participants underwent optometric examinations including the measurement of visual acuity and refraction as well as slit-lamp biomicroscopy to determine the lens status. Biometric measurements and IOLs power calculation were done using the IOL Master 500 and Pentacam AXL. The order of imaging modalities was random in subjects. IOL power calculation was done according to optimized ULIB constants for the Alcon SA60AT lens. The IOL power was calculated according to a target refraction of emmetropia in all subjects.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>After applying the exclusion criteria, 1865 right eyes were analyzed. The mean IOL difference between the two devices was \u22120.33 \u00b1 0.35, \u22120.38 \u00b1 0.39, \u22120.41 \u00b1 0.43, and \u22120.51 \u00b1 0.43 according to the SRK\/T, Holladay, Hoffer Q, and Haigis formulas, respectively. The Pentacam calculated larger IOL power values in all cases. The 95% limits of agreement (LoA) between the two devices for the above formulas were \u22121.01 to 0.35, \u22121.14 to 0.39, \u22121.25 to 0.43, and \u22121.35 to 0.33, respectively. The best LoA were observed in normal lenses for all formulas. The difference in the calculated IOL power between the two devices using the four formulas had a significant correlation with axial length, mean keratometry reading, and anterior chamber depth. According to the results of the four formulas, mean keratometry reading had the highest standardized regression coefficient in all formulas.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Although the difference in the calculated IOL power between IOL Master 500 and Pentacam AXL is not significant clinically, the results of these two devices are not interchangeable due to the wide LoA, especially for the Haigis formula; therefore, it is necessary to optimize lens constants for the Pentacam.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.4103\/joco.joco_32_23","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,6,1]],"date-time":"2024-06-01T18:32:03Z","timestamp":1717266723000},"page":"42-49","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/lww.0000000000001000","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":8,"title":["Comparison of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation between Standard Partial Coherence Interferometry-Based and Scheimpflug-Based Biometers: The Importance of Lens Constant Optimization"],"prefix":"10.4103","volume":"35","author":[{"given":"Sara","family":"Sardari","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Research and Technology Deputy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran"},{"name":"Noor Ophthalmology Research Center, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran, Iran"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Mehdi","family":"Khabazkhoob","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Basic Sciences, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Ebrahim","family":"Jafarzadehpur","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Noor Research Center for Ophthalmic Epidemiology, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran, Iran"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Akbar","family":"Fotouhi","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"276","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2023,8,11]]},"reference":[{"key":"R1-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e130","DOI":"10.1016\/S2214-109X(20)30425-3","volume":"9","year":"2021","journal-title":"Lancet Glob Health"},{"key":"R2-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1406","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jcrs.2017.08.016","article-title":"Comparison of a new Scheimpflug imaging combined with partial coherence interferometry biometer and a low-coherence reflectometry biometer","volume":"43","author":"Ruiz-Mesa","year":"2017","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"R3-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"447","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jcrs.2018.01.031","article-title":"Risk factors for refractive error after cataract surgery:Analysis of 282 811 cataract extractions reported to the European registry of quality outcomes for cataract and refractive surgery","volume":"44","author":"Lundstr\u00f6m","year":"2018","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"R4-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1618","DOI":"10.1097\/j.jcrs.0000000000000361","article-title":"Outcomes of IOL power calculation using measurements by a rotating Scheimpflug camera combined with partial coherence interferometry","volume":"46","author":"Taroni","year":"2020","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"R5-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"169","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ophtha.2017.08.027","article-title":"Accuracy of intraocular lens calculation formulas","volume":"125","author":"Melles","year":"2018","journal-title":"Ophthalmology"},{"key":"R6-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1334","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ophtha.2019.04.011","article-title":"Update on intraocular lens calculation formulas","volume":"126","author":"Melles","year":"2019","journal-title":"Ophthalmology"},{"key":"R7-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"74","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jcrs.2016.11.033","article-title":"Comparison of biometry and intraocular lens power calculation performed by a new optical biometry device and a reference biometer","volume":"43","author":"Ventura","year":"2017","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"R8-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e94","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ophtha.2020.08.010","article-title":"Intraocular lens power formulas, biometry, and intraoperative aberrometry:A review","volume":"128","author":"Kane","year":"2021","journal-title":"Ophthalmology"},{"key":"R9-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"326","DOI":"10.3892\/etm.2021.9757","article-title":"Evaluation and comparison of a novel Scheimpflug-based optical biometer with standard partial coherence interferometry for biometry and intraocular lens power calculation","volume":"21","author":"Wang","year":"2021","journal-title":"Exp Ther Med"},{"key":"R10-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1313","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ophtha.2009.11.041","article-title":"Corneal shape changes after 2.0-mm or 3.0-mm clear corneal versus scleral tunnel incision cataract surgery","volume":"117","author":"Hayashi","year":"2010","journal-title":"Ophthalmology"},{"key":"R11-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"318","DOI":"10.1016\/j.clae.2017.03.007","article-title":"Repeatability and agreement of Scheimpflug-based and swept-source optical biometry measurements","volume":"40","author":"Sel","year":"2017","journal-title":"Cont Lens Anterior Eye"},{"key":"R12-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"58","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajo.2017.02.027","article-title":"Comparison of axial length, corneal curvature, and anterior chamber depth measurements of 2 recently introduced devices to a known biometer","volume":"178","author":"Shajari","year":"2017","journal-title":"Am J Ophthalmol"},{"key":"R13-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"353","DOI":"10.2147\/OPTH.S238112","article-title":"Comparison of biometry measurements using standard partial coherence interferometry versus new Scheimpflug tomography with integrated axial length capability","volume":"14","author":"Haddad","year":"2020","journal-title":"Clin Ophthalmol"},{"key":"R14-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1115","DOI":"10.1007\/s10792-018-0927-x","article-title":"Comparison of anterior segment parameters and axial length measurements performed on a Scheimpflug device with biometry function and a reference optical biometer","volume":"39","author":"Muzyka-Wo\u017aniak","year":"2019","journal-title":"Int Ophthalmol"},{"key":"R15-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"645","DOI":"10.1177\/1120672118771844","article-title":"Lenstar\u00ae LS 900 versus Pentacam\u00ae-AXL:Comparative study of ocular biometric measurements and intraocular lens power calculation","volume":"28","author":"Pereira","year":"2018","journal-title":"Eur J Ophthalmol"},{"key":"R16-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1449","DOI":"10.1038\/s41598-021-81146-2","article-title":"Lenstar LS 900 versus Pentacam-AXL:Analysis of refractive outcomes and predicted refraction","volume":"11","author":"Arruda","year":"2021","journal-title":"Sci Rep"},{"key":"R17-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"328","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jcrs.2018.10.030","article-title":"Accuracy of Scheimpflug-derived corneal biomechanical and tomographic indices for detecting subclinical and mild keratectasia in a South Asian population","volume":"45","author":"Kataria","year":"2019","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"R18-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"102","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajo.2017.05.015","article-title":"Tomographic analysis of anterior and posterior and total corneal refractive power changes after femtosecond laser-assisted keratotomy","volume":"180","author":"L\u00f6ffler","year":"2017","journal-title":"Am J Ophthalmol"},{"key":"R19-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"103","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajo.2013.08.014","article-title":"Corneal topographic and tomographic analysis of fellow eyes in unilateral keratoconus patients using Pentacam","volume":"157","author":"Bae","year":"2014","journal-title":"Am J Ophthalmol"},{"key":"R20-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1065","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jcrs.2014.08.043","article-title":"Effect of keratoconus grades on repeatability of keratometry readings:Comparison of 5 devices","volume":"41","author":"Hashemi","year":"2015","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"R21-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"484","DOI":"10.1136\/bjophthalmol-2020-316193","article-title":"Comparison of 13 formulas for IOL power calculation with measurements from partial coherence interferometry","volume":"105","author":"Savini","year":"2021","journal-title":"Br J Ophthalmol"},{"key":"R22-20240910","first-page":"2478","article-title":"Prevalence of the different types of age-related cataract in an African population","volume":"42","author":"Congdon","year":"2001","journal-title":"Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci"},{"key":"R23-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"975","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0043-110569","article-title":"Interpretation of the intraocular lens constants for the Haigis formula","volume":"234","author":"Schr\u00f6der","year":"2017","journal-title":"Klin Monbl Augenheilkd"},{"key":"R24-20240910","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"241","DOI":"10.3341\/kjo.2017.0063","article-title":"Comparative efficacy of the new optical biometer on intraocular lens power calculation (AL-scan versus IOLMaster)","volume":"32","author":"Ha","year":"2018","journal-title":"Korean J Ophthalmol"}],"container-title":["Journal of Current Ophthalmology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.ovid.com\/10.4103\/joco.joco_32_23","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,26]],"date-time":"2026-08-26T18:48:48Z","timestamp":1787770128000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.ovid.com\/10.4103\/joco.joco_32_23"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2023,1]]},"references-count":24,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2023]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4103\/joco.joco_32_23","relation":{},"ISSN":["2452-2325"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2452-2325","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2023,1]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2023-01-31","name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2023-03-18","name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}