Meta-analysis of optical low-coherence reflectometry versus partial coherence interferometry biometry

Jinhai Huang, Colm McAlinden, Yingying Huang, Daizong Wen, Giacomo Savini, Ruixue Tu, Qinmei Wang

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


A meta-analysis to compare ocular biometry measured by optical low-coherence reflectometry (Lenstar LS900; Haag Streit) and partial coherence interferometry (the IOLMaster optical biometer; Carl Zeiss Meditec). A systematic literature search was conducted for articles published up to August 6th 2015 in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline, Embase, China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database and Wanfang Data. A total of 18 studies involving 1921 eyes were included. There were no statistically significant differences in axial length (mean difference [MD] 0 mm; 95% confidence interval (CI)-0.08 to 0.08 mm; p = 0.92), anterior chamber depth (MD 0.02 mm; 95% CI-0.07 to 0.10 mm; p = 0.67), flat keratometry (MD-0.05 D; 95% CI-0.16 to 0.06 D; p = 0.39), steep keratometry (MD-0.09 D; 95% CI-0.20 to 0.03 D; p = 0.13), and mean keratometry (MD-0.15 D; 95% CI-0.30 to 0.00 D; p = 0.05). The white to white distance showed a statistically significant difference (MD-0.14 mm; 95% CI-0.25 to-0.02 mm; p = 0.02). In conclusion, there was no difference in the comparison of AL, ACD and keratometry readings between the Lenstar and IOLMaster. However the WTW distance indicated a statistically significant difference between the two devices. Apart from the WTW distance, measurements for AL, ACD and keratometry readings may be used interchangeability with both devices.

Original languageEnglish
Article number43414
JournalScientific Reports
Publication statusPublished - Feb 24 2017

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General


Dive into the research topics of 'Meta-analysis of optical low-coherence reflectometry versus partial coherence interferometry biometry'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this