Accuracy of ultrasound vs. Fourier-domain optic biometry for measuring preoperative axial length in cases of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment

• Published in: Japanese journal of ophthalmology Vol. 67; no. 6; pp. 645 - 651
• Main Authors: Kimura, Shuhei, Hosokawa, Mio Morizane, Shiode, Yusuke, Matoba, Ryo, Kanzaki, Yuki, Goto, Yasuhito, Kanenaga, Keisuke, Suzuki, Etsuji, Morizane, Yuki
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Tokyo Springer Japan 01.11.2023; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Biometrics; Clinical Investigation; Eye; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Ophthalmology; Retina; Retinal detachment; Ultrasonic imaging; Ultrasound; Axial length; Macular detachment; Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment; Fourier-domain optic biometry; Ultrasound
• ISSN: 0021-5155; 1613-2246
• DOI: 10.1007/s10384-023-01018-2

Purpose To identify a method for accurately measuring preoperative axial length (AL) in cases of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD). Study design Retrospective study. Methods This retrospective study included 83 eyes of 83 patients who underwent vitrectomy for RRD and had both preoperative and postoperative data for AL. Preoperative AL measurements for the affected eye were obtained using ultrasound (aUS-AL) and compared with those for affected and fellow eyes measured using optical biometry (aOB-AL and fOB-AL, respectively). Absolute differences between preoperative aUS-AL, aOB-AL, or fOB-AL measurements and postoperative AL (aPost-AL) were examined. Results In the 41 eyes without macular detachment, the absolute difference between aOB-AL and aPost-AL (0.06±0.07 mm) was significantly smaller than between aUS-AL and aPost-AL (0.21±0.18 mm) and that between fOB-AL and aPost-AL (0.29±0.35 mm) (P = 0.017 and P < 0.001, respectively). In the 42 eyes with macular detachment, the absolute difference between aOB-AL and aPost-AL (1.22±2.40 mm) was significantly larger than between aUS-AL and aPost-AL (0.24±0.24 mm) and between fOB-AL and aPost-AL (0.35±0.49 mm) (P = 0.006, P = 0.016, respectively). Conclusion The current findings suggest that aOB-AL is more accurate than aUS-AL or fOB-AL in cases of RRD without macular detachment, while aUS-AL or fOB-AL is more accurate than aOB-AL in cases with macular detachment.