Comparison of ocular biometry parameters between IOL master and immersion A-Scan in age group of 35-85 old yrs patients presenting in EHS.

Vishnu kesh Tripathi; Ankit Mishra; Dheeraj Kumar Diwedi

doi:10.69968/ijisem.2026v5i3567-575

Authors

Vishnu kesh Tripathi Assistant Professor Optometry Scpm College of Nursing & Paramedical Science Lucknow Road, Haripur Gonda
Ankit Mishra Associate Professor & HOD Optometry School of optometry sitapur eye hospital sitapur uttarpradesh
Dheeraj Kumar Diwedi Professor SCPM Group of Hospital and Education, Gonda

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69968/ijisem.2026v5i3567-575

Keywords:

Intraocular Lens (IOL) Master, Immersion A-Scan, Ocular Biometry. Left Eye (LE), Right Eye (RE), Patients (Pt)

Abstract

This study compared axial length measurements obtained using IOL Master (optical biometry) and immersion A-scan ultrasonography in 90 patients undergoing cataract surgery, comprising 48 males and 42 females. Patients were stratified into four age groups: 35–50 years (n=19), 50–60 years (n=35), 60–70 years (n=34), and 70–85 years (n=12), and axial length was compared for both eyes within each group. The percentage difference between the two techniques was smallest in the youngest and oldest age groups (0.39–0.99%) and comparatively higher, though still clinically modest, in the middle-aged groups (2.97–3.37%). No age group showed a difference likely to affect intraocular lens power calculation meaningfully. The findings confirm close agreement between IOL Master and immersion A-scan across all age groups, supporting the use of either technique for accurate preoperative biometry in cataract surgery.

References

[1] Y. I. Yun, R. Oh, J. Youn, H. J. Choi, M. K. Kim, and C. H. Yoon, “Longitudinal changes in ocular biometry and their effect on intraocular lens power calculation accuracy in cataract patients,” Graefe’s Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol., vol. 263, no. 7, pp. 1915–1924, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s00417-025-06775-z.

[2] S. Arens, D. Böhringer, T. Lapp, T. Reinhard, and S. Heinzelmann-mink, “Comparative Analysis of Refractive Outcomes Following Cataract Surgery Using IOL Master 500 and IOL Master 700 Biometry Devices: A Retrospective Analysis,” J. Clin. Med., vol. 13, no. 5125, pp. 0–8, 2024.

[3] R. Gopi and S. Sathyan, “Comparison of ocular biometry parameters between IOL Master and applanation A-scan in eyes with short, medium, long, and very long axial lengths,” Kerala J. Ophthalmol., pp. 35–40, 2017, doi: 10.4103/kjo.kjo.

[4] R. S. Shah, V. N. Kulkarni, S. Agrawal, S. M. Gadewar, K. R. Lohokare, and J. D. Kommineni, “Comparing axial length measurements among optical, immersion, and applanation biometry: A cross-sectional study,” Indian J. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 315–320, 2025.

[5] M. Wiryadana and T. Sigalingging, “Analysis of ocular biometry parameters of cataract surgery candidates in Asahan regency, Indonesia,” Intisari Sains Medis, vol. 16, pp. 931–935, Sep. 2025, doi: 10.15562/ism.v16i3.2475.

[6] D. S. Ademola-popoola, D. A. Nzeh, S. E. Saka, L. B. Olokoba, and T. S. Obajolowo, “Comparison of ocular biometry measurements by applanation and immersion A-scan techniques,” J. Curr. Ophthalmol., vol. 27, pp. 110–114, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.joco.2015.12.002.

[7] A. Jamali et al., “Ocular biometry characteristics in cataract surgery candidates: A cross-sectional study,” Med. hypothesis Discov. Innov. Ophthalmol., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 11–17, 2021.

[8] M. Khorrami-nejad, A. M. Khodair, M. Khodaparast, F. B. Mofrad, and F. D. Nasrabadi, “Comparison of the ocular ultrasonic and optical biometry devices in the different quality measurements,” J. Optom., vol. 16, 2023.

[9] Y. Xiong, Y. Lin, Z. Zhao, H. Wang, and G. Zhang, “Evaluation and comparison of ocular biometric parameters obtained with Tomey OA-2000 in silicone oil-filled aphakic eyes,” BMC Ophthalmol., vol. 23, no. 218, pp. 1–7, 2023.

[10] D. S. Ademola-popoola, D. A. Nzeh, S. E. Saka, L. B. Olokoba, and T. S. Obajolowo, “Comparison of ocular biometry measurements by applanation and immersion A-scan techniques,” J. Curr. Ophthalmol., vol. 27, pp. 110–114, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.joco.2015.12.002.

[11] L. Schwarzenbacher et al., “Evolving Strategies in Pediatric Cataract Surgery: A 7-Year Analysis of Ocular Biometry and IOL Localization,” J. Clin. Med., pp. 1–11, 2026.

[12] C. Zheng, R. Ma, X. Hao, W. Geng, L. Jin, and Y. Hu, “Distribution and determinants of lens biometrics in cataract patients: Insights from biometrics and implications for surgical precision,” Photodiagnosis Photodyn. Ther., vol. 56, p. 105221, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2025.105221.

[13] D. Kilic, M. Aksoy, and E. Unsal, “Agreement between pentacam AXL and IOLMaster 700 axial length measurements in a routine cataract population,” Photodiagnosis Photodyn. Ther., vol. 61, p. 105571, 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2026.105571.

[14] T. M. T. Chia, M. T. Nguyen, and H. C. Jung, “Comparison of optical biometry versus ultrasound biometry in cases with borderline signal-to-noise ratio,” Clin. Ophthalmol., 2018, doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S170301.

[15] M. E. Wilson and R. H. Trivedi, “Axial length measurement techniques in pediatric eyes with cataract,” Saudi J. Ophthalmol., vol. 26, pp. 13–17, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.sjopt.2011.11.002.

[16] A. T. Chikara, T. Evans, and S. D. Mathebula, “Ocular axial length and its associations: A systematic review,” African Vis. Eye Heal., pp. 1–9, 2025.

[17] N. Rizzieri and A. Facchin, “Comparison of Eye Axial Length Measurements Taken Using Partial Coherence Interferometry and OCT Biometry,” Vision, vol. 8, no. 46, pp. 1–8, 2024.

[18] D. M. Darade, H. D. Naik, and M. A. Puranik, “A comparison of visual acuities obtained following biometry measurements by contact and immersion A-scan techniques,” Glob. J. Cataract Surg. Res. Ophthalmol., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 10–15, 2024.

[19] R. H. Trivedi and M. E. Wilson, “Axial Length Measurements by Contact and Immersion Techniques in Pediatric Eyes with Cataract,” Ophthalmology., vol. 118, no. 3, pp. 498–502, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.06.042.Axial.

[20] K. Masoud, B. M. Farshid, R. Mahsa, M. Heirani, M. Khodaparast, and R. Yousefi, “Comparison of optical biometry versus ultrasound biometry in different axial length groups,” Saudi J. Ophthalmol., 2024, doi: 10.4103/sjopt.sjopt.

[21] J. Mu et al., “Updated study on demographic and ocular biometric characteristics of cataract patients indicates new trends in cataract surgery,” Sci. Rep., vol. 15, pp. 1–10, 2025.

[22] N. G.- Mojarrad and S. Kearney, “Axial length in clinical practice: Should all optometrists start measuring it?,” Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt., 2025.

[23] M. Pathak, V. Sahu, A. Kumar, K. Kaur, and B. Gurnani, “Current Concepts and Recent Updates of Optical Biometry- A Comprehensive Review,” Clin. Ophthalmol., vol. 18, 2024.

[24] X. Yu et al., “Precision of a new ocular biometer in children and comparison with IOLMaster,” Sci. Rep., vol. 8, no. 1304, pp. 4–11, 2018, doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-19605-6.