Source: J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013;39(12):1803-1809.
December 16, 2013
1 min read

Corneal astigmatism commonly overestimated, underestimated

Source: J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013;39(12):1803-1809.
You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact

Four diagnostic devices overestimated with-the-rule astigmatism and underestimated against-the-rule astigmatism in cataract surgery, according to a study.

The prospective study included 41 eyes of 41 patients. Preoperatively, 17 patients had with-the-rule astigmatism with a corneal steep meridian at 60° to 120°, and 24 patients had against-the-rule astigmatism with a corneal steep meridian at 0° to 30° or 150° to 180°.

Investigators used five devices to measure corneal astigmatism before cataract surgery and 3 weeks postoperatively. Toric IOL alignment was recorded at the slit lamp during surgery and 3 weeks after surgery.

The devices used were the IOLMaster (Carl Zeiss Meditec), the Lenstar (Haag-Streit), the Atlas corneal topographer (Carl Zeiss Meditec), a manual keratometer and the Galilei combined Placido-dual Scheimpflug analyzer (Ziemer).

Actual corneal astigmatism was based on refractive astigmatism 3 weeks after surgery. The 2 formula was used to calculate effective toric power. Prediction error was the difference between astigmatism measured with each device and actual corneal astigmatism.

Mean prediction errors for with-the-rule astigmatism were 0.59 D at 89.7 with the IOLMaster, 0.48 D at 91.2 with the Lenstar, 0.51 D at 78.7 with the Atlas, 0.62 D at 97.2 with the manual keratometer and 0.57 D at 93.9 with the Galilei.

Mean prediction errors for against-the rule astigmatism were 0.17 D at 86.2 with the IOLMaster, 0.23 D at 77.7 with the Lenstar, 0.23 D at 91.4 with the Atlas, 0.41 D at 58.4 with the manual keratometer and 0.12 D at 7.3 with the Galilei.

In against-the-rule eyes, with-the-rule prediction errors were 0.2 D to 0.3 D with all devices except the Galilei. The errors were statistically significant (P < .05).

Disclosure: See the full study for a complete list of all authors’ relevant financial disclosures.