PURPOSE: The study was conducted to assess the central corneal thickness (CCT) of the healthy cornea with a recently developed noncontact specular microscope (EM-3000; Tomey) and compare the results with those measured with a contact specular microscope and an ultrasound pachymeter. Agreement between measurements taken by 2 investigators was also studied. METHODS: The right eyes of 41 healthy individuals who had negative history of contact lens wear, ophthalmic disease, or ocular surgery were examined. The CCT was determined sequentially with a noncontact specular microscope, a contact specular microscope (EM-1000; Tomey), and an ultrasound pachymeter (AL-2000; Tomey). Each evaluation with the specular microscopes was performed by 2 independent operators. RESULTS: A significant difference was detected in pachymetry measurements among the 3 instruments (p=0.01; analysis of variance). The mean CCT values were lower measured with the ultrasound pachymeter (537+/-30 microm) than the contact endothelial microscope (543+/-37 microm, p=0.17, Student t-test) and the noncontact microscope (549+/-33 microm, p<0.0001) (operator 1). There was no statistically significant difference in CCT measurements between the 2 endothelial microscopes (p=0.19). We found significant correlations (p<0.0001) in thickness measurements between each pair of instruments (r=0.91, noncontact microscopy and ultrasound pachymetry; r=0.74, noncontact and contact microscopy; r=0.72, contact microscopy and ultrasound pachymetry; Spearman rank correlation). CONCLUSIONS: The strong correlations among the 3 pachymetry devices suggest that the tested instruments provide reliable measurements; however, they cannot be used interchangeably.
PURPOSE: The study was conducted to assess the central corneal thickness (CCT) of the healthy cornea with a recently developed noncontact specular microscope (EM-3000; Tomey) and compare the results with those measured with a contact specular microscope and an ultrasound pachymeter. Agreement between measurements taken by 2 investigators was also studied. METHODS: The right eyes of 41 healthy individuals who had negative history of contact lens wear, ophthalmic disease, or ocular surgery were examined. The CCT was determined sequentially with a noncontact specular microscope, a contact specular microscope (EM-1000; Tomey), and an ultrasound pachymeter (AL-2000; Tomey). Each evaluation with the specular microscopes was performed by 2 independent operators. RESULTS: A significant difference was detected in pachymetry measurements among the 3 instruments (p=0.01; analysis of variance). The mean CCT values were lower measured with the ultrasound pachymeter (537+/-30 microm) than the contact endothelial microscope (543+/-37 microm, p=0.17, Student t-test) and the noncontact microscope (549+/-33 microm, p<0.0001) (operator 1). There was no statistically significant difference in CCT measurements between the 2 endothelial microscopes (p=0.19). We found significant correlations (p<0.0001) in thickness measurements between each pair of instruments (r=0.91, noncontact microscopy and ultrasound pachymetry; r=0.74, noncontact and contact microscopy; r=0.72, contact microscopy and ultrasound pachymetry; Spearman rank correlation). CONCLUSIONS: The strong correlations among the 3 pachymetry devices suggest that the tested instruments provide reliable measurements; however, they cannot be used interchangeably.