PURPOSE: To compare corneal thickness profiles of cross-sections of cornea determined by arc-scanned immersion ultrasound and optical coherence tomography (OCT). METHODS: Corneas of 28 eyes from 14 participants were scanned in triplicate using the Artemis 2 high-frequency arc-scanned ultrasound system (ArcScan Inc) and the Visante OCT system (Carl Zeiss Meditec). Corneal thickness and reproducibility were compared within 3.5 mm of central cornea in the horizontal plane. RESULTS: Although highly correlated, Visante central and peripheral corneal thickness values were systematically thinner than Artemis 2 values. Within the central 0.5 mm, the difference was approximately 8 μm, but the difference increased with distance from the center. Reproducibility for each instrument was comparable, measuring <4 μm centrally and increasing peripherally. CONCLUSIONS: Visante OCT measurements of corneal thickness are thinner than Artemis 2 ultrasound values centrally with an increasing difference with peripheral position. Measurement reproducibility was comparable for the two techniques. Copyright 2013, SLACK Incorporated.
PURPOSE: To compare corneal thickness profiles of cross-sections of cornea determined by arc-scanned immersion ultrasound and optical coherence tomography (OCT). METHODS: Corneas of 28 eyes from 14 participants were scanned in triplicate using the Artemis 2 high-frequency arc-scanned ultrasound system (ArcScan Inc) and the Visante OCT system (Carl Zeiss Meditec). Corneal thickness and reproducibility were compared within 3.5 mm of central cornea in the horizontal plane. RESULTS: Although highly correlated, Visante central and peripheral corneal thickness values were systematically thinner than Artemis 2 values. Within the central 0.5 mm, the difference was approximately 8 μm, but the difference increased with distance from the center. Reproducibility for each instrument was comparable, measuring <4 μm centrally and increasing peripherally. CONCLUSIONS: Visante OCT measurements of corneal thickness are thinner than Artemis 2 ultrasound values centrally with an increasing difference with peripheral position. Measurement reproducibility was comparable for the two techniques. Copyright 2013, SLACK Incorporated.
Authors: Jose Manuel González-Méijome; Alejandro Cerviño; Eva Yebra-Pimentel; Manuel A Parafita Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 3.351
Authors: Dan Z Reinstein; Marine Gobbe; Timothy J Archer; Ronald H Silverman; D Jackson Coleman Journal: J Refract Surg Date: 2010-04-07 Impact factor: 3.573