方法：选取2013-07/10于我院诊断为年龄相关性白内障患者58例98眼术前分别进行IOL Master、接触式A超和浸润式A超的ACD测量，应用方差分析对三种方法的测量结果差异进行比较，应用Blant-Altman分析法比较其一致性。

结果：IOL Master测量ACD为2.31～3.90(平均3.03±0.38)mm； 接触式A超测量ACD为1.51～4.06(平均2.88±0.56)mm； 浸润式A超测量ACD为1.99～4.17(平均3.17±0.38)mm。IOL Master和接触式A超的ACD测量值差异有统计学意义(P=0.022<0.05)。IOL Master和浸润式A超ACD测量值差异有统计学意义(P=0.031<0.05)。接触式A超与浸润式A超ACD测量值差异有统计学意义(P=0.000<0.05)。三种方法相互间一致性均较差。

结论：三种方法测量白内障患者ACD时，浸润式A超测得结果最大，IOL Master次之，接触式A超测得结果最小，三者相互间一致性均较差，临床不建议相互替代。

METHODS:Fifty-eight cases(98 eyes)with age-related cataract during July to October in 2013 did the A-scan ultrasound with contact and immersion measurements and IOL Master to get the results of ACD. Difference in measurements between methods was assessed using the variance analysisi. Consistency was assessed using Bland-Altman.

RESULTS: The ACD measured by IOL Master was 2.31～3.90mm, the mean was 3.03±0.38mm. The ACD measured by contact A-scan ultrasound was 1.51～4.06mm, the mean was 2.88±0.56mm. The ACD measured by immersion A-scan ultrasound was 1.99～4.17mm, the mean was 3.17±0.38mm. The results of IOL Master and contact A-scan ultrasound had statistical differences(P=0.022<0.05). The results of IOL Master and immersion A-scan ultrasound had statistical differences(P=0.031<0.05). The results of contact A-scan ultrasound and immersion A-scan ultrasound had statistical differences(P=0.000<0.05). The consistency between three methods was poor.

CONCLUSION: The rank of ACD of patients with cataract is immersion A-scan ultrasound, IOL Master and contact A-scan ultrasound. The consistency is poor, and the three methods can't be interchanged clinically.