To evaluate the reliability and agreement between Fully Refocused Steady-State magnetic resonance sequences (FRSS) and the IOLMaster® 500 optical biometer for measuring anterior chamber depth (ACD) and axial length (AL).
In a sample of 32 healthy volunteers, separate observers measured the ACD and AL of both eyes using both techniques (inter-method) and through repeated FRSS measurements (interobserver) and by the same observer (intraobserver). We employed the Bland–Altman method to determine the agreement between FRSS and partial coherence interferometry (using the IOLMaster®) and the interobserver and intraobserver variability, providing the limits of agreement (LoA, or mean difference ± 1.96 SD). Correlation coefficients and intraclass correlation coefficients were also provided.
For ACD measurements with FRSS in pseudo-color scale, we obtained an LoA of 0.016 ± 0.266 mm compared with partial coherence interferometry. For AL with FRSS in greyscale, the LoA was 0.019 ± 0.383 mm. Maximum interobserver variability showed a − 0.036 ± 0.247 mm LoA for ACD with FRSS in pseudo-color scale. Maximum intraobserver variability was 0.000 ± 0.157 mm LoA for AL with FRSS in greyscale.
ACD and AL measurements using FRSS sequencing present high LoA and reliability when compared with partial coherence interferometry using the IOLMaster® 500. The results were better for FRSS in pseudo-color scale in ACD determination and for FRSS in greyscale in AL determination. FRSS would not be recommended for IOL power calculation due to variability of AL measurement.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Wu Y, Liu S, Liao R (2017) Prediction accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation methods after laser refractive surgery. BMC Ophthalmol 17(1):44. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-017-0439-x
Yanagisawa M, Yamashita T, Matsuura M, Fujino Y, Murata H, Asaoka R (2018) Changes in axial length and progression of visual field damage in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 59(1):407–417. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.17-22949
Wang W, Li X, Chen S, Huang W, Zhang X (2018) Biometric differences between unilateral chronic primary angle closure glaucoma and fellow non-glaucomatous eyes. Semin Ophthalmol 33(5):595–601. https://doi.org/10.1080/08820538.2017.1375121
Lee AC, Qazi MA, Pepose JS (2008) Biometry and intraocular lens power calculation. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 19(1):13–17. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICU.0b013e3282f1c5ad
Chia TMT, Nguyen MT, Jung HC (2018) Comparison of optical biometry versus ultrasound biometry in cases with borderline signal-to-noise ratio. Clin Ophthalmol 12:1757–1762. https://doi.org/10.2147/opth.S170301
Townsend KA, Wollstein G, Schuman JS (2008) Clinical application of MRI in ophthalmology. NMR Biomed 21(9):997–1002. https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.1247
Obata T, Uemura K, Nonaka H, Tamura M, Tanada S, Ikehira H (2006) Optimizing T2-weighted magnetic resonance sequences for surface coil microimaging of the eye with regard to lid, eyeball and head moving artifacts. Magn Reson Imag 24(1):97–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2005.10.011
Herrick RC, Hayman LA, Taber KH, Diaz-Marchan PJ, Kuo MD (1997) Artifacts and pitfalls in MR imaging of the orbit: a clinical review. Radiographics 17(3):707–724. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiographics.17.3.9153707
Chavhan GB, Babyn PS, Jankharia BG, Cheng HL, Shroff MM (2008) Steady-state MR imaging sequences: physics, classification, and clinical applications. Radiographics 28(4):1147–1160. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.284075031
GRANMO sample size and power calculator. Institut Hosital del Mar d´Investigacions Mediques, Barcelona (Spain). https://www.imim.cat/ofertadeserveis/software-public/granmo/. Accesed 12 March 2019.
Prieto L, Lamarca R, Casado A (1998) Assessment of the reliability of clinical findings: the intraclass correlation coefficient. Med Clin 110(4):142–145
Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476):307–310
Fea AM, Annetta F, Cirillo S, Campanella D, De Giuseppe M, Regge D, Grignolo FM (2005) Magnetic resonance imaging and Orbscan assessment of the anterior chamber. J Cataract Refract Surg 31(9):1713–1718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2005.02.040
Nagra M, Gilmartin B, Logan NS (2014) Estimation of ocular volume from axial length. Br J Ophthalmol 98(12):1697–1701. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-304652
Akduman EI, Nacke RE, Leiva PM, Akduman L (2008) Accuracy of ocular axial length measurement with MRI. Ophthalmologica 222(6):397–399. https://doi.org/10.1159/000153419
Guo X, Xiao O, Chen Y, Wu H, Chen L, Morgan IG, He M (2017) Three-dimensional eye shape, myopic maculopathy, and visual acuity: the zhongshan ophthalmic center-brien holden vision institute high myopia cohort study. Ophthalmology 124(5):679–687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.01.009
Dominguez-Vicent A, Perez-Vives C, Ferrer-Blasco T, Garcia-Lazaro S, Montes-Mico R (2016) Device interchangeability on anterior chamber depth and white-to-white measurements: a thorough literature review. Int J Ophthalmol 9(7):1057–1065
Nemeth G, Hassan Z, Modis L Jr, Szalai E, Katona K, Berta A (2011) Comparison of anterior chamber depth measurements conducted with Pentacam HR(R) and IOLMaster(R). Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imag 42(2):144–147. https://doi.org/10.3928/15428877-20110210-03
Utine CA, Altin F, Cakir H, Perente I (2009) Comparison of anterior chamber depth measurements taken with the Pentacam, Orbscan IIz and IOLMaster in myopic and emmetropic eyes. Acta Ophthalmol 87(4):386–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-3768.2008.01278.x
Dinc UA, Gorgun E, Oncel B, Yenerel MN, Alimgil L (2010) Assessment of anterior chamber depth using Visante optical coherence tomography, slitlamp optical coherence tomography, IOL Master, Pentacam and Orbscan IIz. Ophthalmologica 224(6):341–346. https://doi.org/10.1159/000313815
Muzyka-Wozniak M, Oleszko A (2019) Comparison of anterior segment parameters and axial length measurements performed on a Scheimpflug device with biometry function and a reference optical biometer. Int Ophthalmol 39(5):1115–1122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-018-0927-x
Rozema JJ, Wouters K, Mathysen DG, Tassignon MJ (2014) Overview of the repeatability, reproducibility, and agreement of the biometry values provided by various ophthalmic devices. Am J Ophthalmol 158(6):1111-1120.e1111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2014.08.014
Savant V, Chavan R, Pushpoth S, Ilango B (2008) Comparability and intra-/interobserver reliability of anterior chamber depth measurements with the Pentacam and IOLMaster. J Refract Surg 24(6):615–618. https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597x-20080601-11
Badano A, Revie C, Casertano A, Cheng WC, Green P, Kimpe T, Krupinski E, Sisson C, Skrovseth S, Treanor D, Boynton P, Clunie D, Flynn MJ, Heki T, Hewitt S, Homma H, Masia A, Matsui T, Nagy B, Nishibori M, Penczek J, Schopf T, Yagi Y, Yokoi H (2015) Consistency and standardization of color in medical imaging: a consensus report. J Digit Imag 28(1):41–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-014-9721-0
Tanitame K, Sone T, Miyoshi T, Tanitame N, Otani K, Akiyama Y, Takasu M, Date S, Kiuchi Y, Awai K (2013) Ocular volumetry using fast high-resolution MRI during visual fixation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 34(4):870–876. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A3305
Kuo AN, Verkicharla PK, McNabb RP, Cheung CY, Hilal S, Farsiu S, Chen C, Wong TY, Ikram MK, Cheng CY, Young TL, Saw SM, Izatt JA (2016) Posterior eye shape measurement with retinal OCT compared to MRI. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 57(9):196–203. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.15-18886
Erb-Eigner K, Hirnschall N, Hackl C, Schmidt C, Asbach P, Findl O (2015) Predicting lens diameter: ocular biometry with high-resolution MRI. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 56(11):6847–6854. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.15-17228
Tehrani M, Krummenauer F, Blom E, Dick HB (2003) Evaluation of the practicality of optical biometry and applanation ultrasound in 253 eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg 29(4):741–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0886-3350(02)01740-6
Berges O, Puech M, Assouline M, Letenneur L, Gastellu-Etchegorry M (1998) B-mode-guided vector-A-mode versus A-mode biometry to determine axial length and intraocular lens power. J Cataract Refract Surg 24(4):529–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0886-3350(98)80297-6
Dong J, Zhang Y, Zhang H, Jia Z, Zhang S, Wang X (2018) Comparison of axial length, anterior chamber depth and intraocular lens power between IOLMaster and ultrasound in normal, long and short eyes. PLoS ONE 13(3):e0194273. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194273
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Conflict of interest
All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
This project has been approved by out institution ethics committee and has been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.
All participants signed an informed consent form.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Perez-Sanchez, L.I., Gutierrez-Vazquez, J., Satrustegui-Lapetra, M. et al. Ocular biometry through fully refocused steady-state magnetic resonance imaging sequence: reliability and agreement with the IOLMaster® 500. Int Ophthalmol (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-021-01748-7
- Magnetic resonance imaging
- Eye axial length
- Anterior chamber