These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
6. Desktop auxiliary apparatus for A-scan ultrasound: repeatability and validity. Huang H; Ding X; Wang D; Yang X; Wang D; He M J Cataract Refract Surg; 2012 Jan; 38(1):97-101. PubMed ID: 22078119 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation using three optical biometry measurement devices: the OA-2000, Lenstar-LS900 and IOLMaster-500. Reitblat O; Levy A; Kleinmann G; Assia EI Eye (Lond); 2018 Jul; 32(7):1244-1252. PubMed ID: 29527012 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of a new optical biometry with an optical low-coherence reflectometry for ocular biometry. Güler E; Kulak AE; Totan Y; Yuvarlak A; Hepşen İF Cont Lens Anterior Eye; 2016 Oct; 39(5):336-41. PubMed ID: 27344235 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Clinical comparison of biometry using the non-contact optical low coherence reflectometer (Lenstar LS 900) and contact ultrasound biometer (Tomey AL-3000) in cataract eyes. Tappeiner C; Rohrer K; Frueh BE; Waelti R; Goldblum D Br J Ophthalmol; 2010 May; 94(5):666-7. PubMed ID: 20447976 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. [Accuracy of immersion B-scan ultrasound biometry in high myopic patients with cataract]. Yang Q; Chen B; Peng G; Li Z; Huang Y Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2014 Jan; 50(1):32-6. PubMed ID: 24709131 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of biometric measurements using partial coherence interferometry and applanation ultrasound. Tehrani M; Krummenauer F; Kumar R; Dick HB J Cataract Refract Surg; 2003 Apr; 29(4):747-52. PubMed ID: 12686243 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of IOL--master and ultrasound biometry in preoperative intra ocular lens (IOL) power calculation. Kolega MŠ; Kovačević S; Čanović S; Pavičić AD; Bašić JK Coll Antropol; 2015 Mar; 39(1):233-5. PubMed ID: 26040097 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of predictions made by the intraocular lens master and ultrasound biometry. Bhatt AB; Schefler AC; Feuer WJ; Yoo SH; Murray TG Arch Ophthalmol; 2008 Jul; 126(7):929-33. PubMed ID: 18625938 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of the practicality of optical biometry and applanation ultrasound in 253 eyes. Tehrani M; Krummenauer F; Blom E; Dick HB J Cataract Refract Surg; 2003 Apr; 29(4):741-6. PubMed ID: 12686242 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Ultrasound biometry vs. IOL Master. Roy A; Das S; Sahu SK; Rath S Ophthalmology; 2012 Sep; 119(9):1937.e1-2. PubMed ID: 22944497 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of immersion ultrasound, partial coherence interferometry, and low coherence reflectometry for ocular biometry in cataract patients. Montés-Micó R; Carones F; Buttacchio A; Ferrer-Blasco T; Madrid-Costa D J Refract Surg; 2011 Sep; 27(9):665-71. PubMed ID: 21323302 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Concordance and interchangeability of biometric measurements of ocular axial length in patients awaiting cataract surgery. Martín-Serrano MJ; Roman-Ortiz C; Villa-Sáez ML; Labrador-Castellanos MP; Blanco-Carrasco R; Lozano-Ballesteros F; Pedraza-Martín C; José-Herrero MT; López-Ropero AM; Tenías Burillo JM Eur J Ophthalmol; 2014; 24(1):29-34. PubMed ID: 23787451 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Performance of three biometry devices in patients with different grades of age-related cataract. Mylonas G; Sacu S; Buehl W; Ritter M; Georgopoulos M; Schmidt-Erfurth U Acta Ophthalmol; 2011 May; 89(3):e237-41. PubMed ID: 21310011 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]