Comparison of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Using Biometric Data From Pentacam AXL vs. IOLMaster 700 in Postphotorefractive Keratectomy Patients

Purpose To compare intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation using biometric data from Pentacam AXL vs. IOLMaster 700 in postphotorefractive keratectomy (PRK) patients. Methods Patients with previous PRK and 1 year of postoperative follow‐up were included in the study. Anterior segment parameters were assessed by the Pentacam AXL and IOLMaster 700 devices, and measurements were compared using the paired t‐test. Predicted IOL power was calculated using the Barrett True‐K no history, Shammas‐PL, Haigis‐L, and average ASCRS formulas. The interchangeability of the devices was assessed by calculating the 95% limits of agreement (95% LoA) and the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). Results A total of 39 eyes of 39 patients were included. The mean difference (MD; Pentacam–IOLMaster) and CCC for mean K, AL, ACD, CCT, and WTW distance were (−0.26 ± 0.19 D p < 0.05; 0.983), (0.01 ± 0.06 mm; 0.998), (0.009 ± 0.035 mm; 0.993), (1.5 ± 7.2 μm; 0.983) and (−0.27 ± 0.13 mm p < 0.05; 0.705), respectively. The MD, CCC, and 95% LoA for IOL power calculation with the Barrett true‐K no history, Shammas‐PL, Haigis‐L, and average formula were (0.45 ± 0.23 D; 0.933; 0.01–0.90), (‐0.25 ± 0.48 D; 0.918; −1.20 to 0.70), (0.33 ± 0.27 D; 0.952; −0.20–0.87) and (0.18 ± 0.27 D; 0.970; −0.35–0.72), respectively. All p values for MD of IOL power calculation were less than 0.05. Conclusions In post‐PRK eyes, Pentacam and IOLMaster showed substantial agreement for AL, ACD, and CCT but not for Km and WTW distance, with the latter showing very poor agreement. The two devices could not be used interchangeably for IOL power calculation with any of the 4 studied formulas; however, the strongest to the weakest agreement was observed for the Average formula, Haigis‐L, Barrett, and Shammas‐PL formulas, respectively.