Comparison of Ocular Biometry and Postoperative Refraction in Cataract Patients between Galilei-G6® and IOL Master®

??: Galilei G6(R)? IOL master(R)? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ? ??? ?? ? ??? ??? ???? ????? ???. ??? ??: ??? ??? ?? ?? 50? 50?? ???? Galilei G6(R), IOL master(R)? ???? ?? ? ???, ????, ??? ??? ?????. ?????? ????? SRK/T ??? ?????, ??? ?? 4-6? ? ???????? ??? ????? ?? ???? ? ??? ???? ???? ??????? ?????. ??: Galilei G6(R)? IOL master(R)?? ??? ???? ??? ?? 23.36 ± 0.80 mm, 23.36 ± 0.90 mm??? ????? ??? ??? ???(p=0.321). Galilei G6(R)? IOL master(R)?? ??? ????? ?? 3.22 ± 0.35 mm, 3.11 ± 0.46 mm (p?0.001), ?????????? ?? 44.29 ± 1.40D, 44.39 ± 1.41D (p=0.028)? ????, ????????? ?? ??? ??? ???. IOL master(R)? ??? Galilei G6(R)??? ??? ????? ??? ????? ??? ??? ???(p=0.423). ??: Galilei G6(R)? IOL master(R)? ??? ?????? ??? ? ??? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ? ?????? ??? ??? ???. ?? ??? ?? ? ??? ??? ???? ? ???? ? ??? ???. <??????? 2015;56(4):515-520> <?? ??> Purpose: To compare the axial lengths, anterior chamber depths, and keratometric measurements and to predict postoperative refractions of Dual Scheimpflug analyzer Galilei G6(R) and intra ocular lens (IOL) Master(R). Methods: A total of 50 eyes in 50 patients who received cataract surgery were included in the present study. The axial length, anterior chamber depth, and keratometry were measured using 2 types of partial coherence interferometries (Galilei G6(R) and IOL Master(R)). The SRK/T formula was used to calculate IOL power and the predictive error which subtracts predictive refraction from postoperative refraction was compared between the ocular biometry devices. Results: Axial lengths were 23.36 ± 0.80 mm and 23.36 ± 0.90 mm measured by Galilei G6(R) and IOL Master(R), respectively. Axial length measured by Galilei G6(R) was not statistically significant compared with IOL Master(R) (p = 0.321). The anterior chamber depth and keratometry were 3.22 ± 0.35 mm and 44.29 ± 1.40 D measured by Galilei G6(R) and 3.11 ± 0.46 mm and 44.39 ± 1.41 D measured by IOL Master(R), respectively. The differences of anterior chamber depth and keratometry between the 2 devices were statistically significant (p < 0.001 and p = 0.028, respectively). The mean absolute prediction errors were 0.45 ± 0.37 D and 0.49 ± 0.39 D in Galilei G6(R) and IOL Master(R), respectively and was not statistically significantly different (p = 0.423). Conclusions: The ocular biometric measurements and prediction of postoperative refraction using Galilei G6(R) were as accurate as with IOL Master(R). J Korean Ophthalmol Soc 2015;56(4):515-520