| Literature DB >> 27645227 |
Qihua Le1,2,3, Yan Chen1, Yujing Yang1, Jianjiang Xu4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare corneal epithelial thickness (CET) and limbal epithelial thickness (LET) measured by anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) and in vivo confocal microscope (IVCM) in normal subjects, and evaluate the consistency between them.Entities:
Keywords: Anterior segment optical coherence tomography; Corneal epithelium; Epithelial thickness; In vivo confocal microscopy; Limbal epithelium
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27645227 PMCID: PMC5029042 DOI: 10.1186/s12886-016-0342-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Ophthalmol ISSN: 1471-2415 Impact factor: 2.209
Fig. 1Measurement of epithelial thickness by AS-OCT (a) and IVCM (b-d). a Evaluation of limbal epithelium in an AS-OCT cross-line scan image. The corneoscleral transitional zone was firstly determined according to the limbus anatomical landmarks, which was 1.0-mm wide extending centripetally from the scleral spur according to the anatomical definition. Shaded region indicates the target limbal epithelium. The LET was measured between anterior and posterior epithelial surface (two black curves). b The image of corneal superficial epithelial cells. The depth of superficial of epthelium was 0 μm, as shown in the red frame. c The final image of basal epithelial cells at central cornea. Its depth was 50 μm. d The final of image of basal epithelial cells between the palisades of Vogt at limbal area. Its depth was 67 μm
Fig. 2Schematic corneas displaying epithelial thickness of central, superior, inferior, temporal and nasal corneas. The figs. in each zone represented mean epithelial thickness measured by AS-OCT and IVCM and the bias (mean difference) between AS-OCT and IVCM (AS-OCT minus CM). An asterisk denoted significant difference in mean thickness reading for this epithelial zone between AS-OCT and IVCM (P <0 .05). T = temporal; N = nasal
Fig. 3Bland-Altman charts showed difference in average corneal epithelial thickness measurements in relation to mean measurement between the two methods (AS-OCT minus IVCM). A positive difference showed that the values measured by AS-OCT was thicker. Bias ± 95 % limits of agreement were also displayed. No relationship was found between differences in central, superior, inferior, temporal or nasal epithelial thickness
The evaluation on consistency between two devices
| Bias (μm) | 95 % Limits of Agreement (μm) | Plots out of 95%LoA | Maximum Bias/Average | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CC | 3.68 ± 5.08 | −6.27 ~ 13.64 | 5.56 %(2/36) | 33.47 % |
| SL | 3.01 ± 14.36 | −25.17 ~ 31.19 | 8.33 %(3/36) | 49.25 % |
| IL | 4.24 ± 16.34 | −27.79 ~ 36.27 | 8.33 %(3/36) | 44.55 % |
| TL | 5.35 ± 8.95 | −12.27 ~ 22.97 | 5.56 %(2/36) | 41.65 % |
| NL | 5.10 ± 12.45 | −19.30 ~ 29.50 | 5.56 %(2/36) | 40.93 % |
CC central cornea, SL superior limbus, IL inferior limbus, TL temporal limbus, NL nasal limbus
CET and LET comparisons between subgroups ≤40 and >40 years old
| CC (μm) | SL(μm) | IL(μm) | TL(μm) | NL(μm) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ≤40 | IVCM | 52.2 ± 4.4 | 77.2 ± 13.6 | 74.6 ± 14.5 | 58.2 ± 9.5 | 58.9 ± 13.5 |
| AS-OCT | 54.9 ± 4.0 | 73.6 ± 6.0 | 76.1 ± 9.9 | 61.8 ± 7.6 | 60.0 ± 6.9 | |
| P | 0.282 | 0.064a | 0.701 | 0.346 | 0.725 | |
| >40 | IVCM | 51.6 ± 5.2 | 67.3 ± 14.7 | 67.6 ± 14.9 | 53.2 ± 8.6 | 52.3 ± 10.5 |
| AS-OCT | 56.3 ± 3.8 | 76.9 ± 8.1 | 74.5 ± 12.5 | 60.3 ± 5.6 | 62.4 ± 4.9 | |
| P | 0.006† | 0.005† | 0.007† | 0.001† | 0.003† | |
| IVCM | ≤40 | 52.2 ± 4.4 | 77.2 ± 13.6 | 74.6 ± 14.5 | 58.2 ± 9.5 | 58.9 ± 13.5 |
| >40 | 51.6 ± 5.2 | 67.3 ± 14.7 | 67.6 ± 14.9 | 53.2 ± 8.6 | 52.3 ± 10.5 | |
| P | 0.731 | 0.044* | 0.077 | 0.104 | 0.165 | |
| AS-OCT | ≤40 | 54.9 ± 4.0 | 73.6 ± 6.0 | 76.1 ± 9.9 | 61.8 ± 7.6 | 60.0 ± 6.9 |
| >40 | 56.3 ± 3.8 | 76.9 ± 8.1 | 74.5 ± 12.5 | 60.3 ± 5.6 | 62.4 ± 4.9 | |
| P | 0.28 | 0.178 | 0.656 | 0.511 | 0.235 |
CC central cornea, SL superior limbus, IL inferior limbus, TL temporal limbus, NL nasal limbus
a Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test was used because this paired group didn’t conform to Gaussian distribution, * P < 0.05, † P < 0.01, ‡ P < 0.001