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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

133 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2674412)

  • 1. Comparison of contact and immersion techniques for axial length measurement and implant power calculation.
    Schelenz J; Kammann J
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 1989 Jul; 15(4):425-8. PubMed ID: 2674412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Axial length measurements by contact and immersion techniques in pediatric eyes with cataract.
    Trivedi RH; Wilson ME
    Ophthalmology; 2011 Mar; 118(3):498-502. PubMed ID: 21035871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Comparison of contact and immersion techniques of ultrasound biometry].
    Hrebcová J; Vasků A
    Cesk Slov Oftalmol; 2008 Jan; 64(1):16-8. PubMed ID: 18225494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Immersion B-guided versus contact A-mode biometry for accurate measurement of axial length and intraocular lens power calculation in siliconized eyes.
    Abu El Einen KG; Shalaby MH; El Shiwy HT
    Retina; 2011 Feb; 31(2):262-5. PubMed ID: 20829737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of intraocular lens power calculation by the IOLMaster in phakic and eyes with hydrophobic acrylic lenses.
    Chang SW; Yu CY; Chen DP
    Ophthalmology; 2009 Jul; 116(7):1336-42. PubMed ID: 19427697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Intraocular lens calculation and ultrasound biometry: immersion and contact procedures].
    Hoffmann PC; Hütz WW; Eckhardt HB; Heuring AH
    Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 1998 Sep; 213(3):161-5. PubMed ID: 9793914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect of anterior chamber depth on the choice of intraocular lens calculation formula in patients with normal axial length.
    Miraftab M; Hashemi H; Fotouhi A; Khabazkhoob M; Rezvan F; Asgari S
    Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol; 2014; 21(4):307-11. PubMed ID: 25371635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of axial length, anterior chamber depth and intraocular lens power between IOLMaster and ultrasound in normal, long and short eyes.
    Dong J; Zhang Y; Zhang H; Jia Z; Zhang S; Wang X
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(3):e0194273. PubMed ID: 29543854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Accuracy of the newer generation intraocular lens power calculation formulas in long and short eyes.
    Olsen T; Thim K; Corydon L
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 1991 Mar; 17(2):187-93. PubMed ID: 2040976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Comparison of contact and immersion techniques of ultrasound biometry in terms of target postoperative refraction].
    Hrebcová J; Skorkovská S; Vasků A
    Cesk Slov Oftalmol; 2009 Jul; 65(4):143-6. PubMed ID: 19750832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Biometry and intraocular lens power calculation.
    Findl O
    Curr Opin Ophthalmol; 2005 Feb; 16(1):61-4. PubMed ID: 15650582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Achieving emmetropia in extremely short eyes with two piggyback posterior chamber intraocular lenses.
    Holladay JT; Gills JP; Leidlein J; Cherchio M
    Ophthalmology; 1996 Jul; 103(7):1118-23. PubMed ID: 8684803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Comparison between Lenstar LS 900 non-contact biometry and OcuScan RXP contact biometry for task delegation].
    El Chehab H; Giraud JM; Le Corre A; Chave N; Durand F; Kuter S; Ract-Madoux G; Swalduz B; Mourgues G; Dot C
    J Fr Ophtalmol; 2011 Mar; 34(3):175-80. PubMed ID: 21257228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Performance of the SRK/T formula using A-Scan ultrasound biometry after phacoemulsification in eyes with short and long axial lengths.
    Karabela Y; Eliacik M; Kaya F
    BMC Ophthalmol; 2016 Jul; 16():96. PubMed ID: 27391470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Axial length measurement and its relation to intraocular lens power calculations.
    Shammas HJ
    J Am Intraocul Implant Soc; 1982; 8(4):346-9. PubMed ID: 7166517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of A-scan device accuracy.
    Giers U; Epple C
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 1990 Mar; 16(2):235-42. PubMed ID: 2329484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Biometry--an exact method for the measurement of the axial length of the eye].
    Hauff W
    Wien Klin Wochenschr; 1983 Apr; 95(8):271-4. PubMed ID: 6880209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Intraocular lens power calculation--the selection of formula.
    Hillman JS
    Trans Ophthalmol Soc U K (1962); 1985; 104 ( Pt 7)():693-8. PubMed ID: 3868211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The emmetropic and the iseikonic implant lens: computer calculation of the refractive power and its accuracy.
    Thijssen JM
    Ophthalmologica; 1975; 171(6):467-86. PubMed ID: 1178154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Accuracy of intraocular lens power prediction using the Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, and SRK/T formulas.
    Narváez J; Zimmerman G; Stulting RD; Chang DH
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2006 Dec; 32(12):2050-3. PubMed ID: 17137982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.