Indirect ophthalmoscope

[Mokaccino]

For the indirect. What do you guys prefer, LED or halogen light source?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[MullerCell]

I started using LED a few years ago and really like it. Currently use a wireless Keeler Vantage Plus. The battery last forever (literally over a month) and I use it on 30-40 pts per day. If you are used to halogen, there is a mild adjustment because color hues will seem slightly different, but for me it provides a notably crisper image and I don't think that patients are bothered by brightness any more than with holagen.

Personally, I always use the middle sized light aperture. I didn't start doing this until fellowship, but I much prefer it to the large aperture, so would buy an idirect that has 3 apertures, not just a fixed large aperture. As a side tidbit, using a 20D lens, the middle light aperture will create a 7mm circle of illumination on the fundus which is helpful for judging distances, sizing pigmented lesions, ect.

 

[Slide]

Out of curiosity, why the middle aperature? Is the image crisper or easier to see? I'm used to using the large aperature but now that my indirect technique is better, I'm finding the middle one sometimes provides a better view.

 

[speyeder]

I prefer LED over halogen. LED bulbs will last almost forever. Halogen bulbs don't last nearly as long and I've had a few blow out on me while I was examining patients. LED bulbs also use less energy, so coupled with a lithium ion battery you can go days without needing to recharge. They are also brighter so in patients with dense cataracts, I can visualize the retina a bit better.

 

[Visionary]

LED is superior in every way.

 

[Mokaccino]

Thank you!