Saadettin Sel1, Jana Stange2, Delia Kaiser1, Laszlo Kiraly3. 1. Universitäts-Augenklinik, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany. 2. NordBlick Augenklinik Bellevue, Lindenallee 21-23, 24105 Kiel, Germany. 3. Augen- und Laserzentrum Leipzig, Lampe Straße 1, 04107 Leipzig, Germany. Electronic address: lkiraly@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the repeatability and comparability of biometry parameters between a Scheimpflug-based topography with axial length measurement (Pentacam AXL, Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) and a swept-source optical biometry (IOLMaster 700, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany). METHODS: A total of 50 eyes from 50 adult subjects had biometry measurements in one session three times using the Pentacam AXL and the IOLMaster 700. Keratometry, anterior chamber depth (ACD) and axial length (AL) values were obtained by both devices. Mean keratometry (Kmean) was calculated and the corneal spherocylinder was converted into power vectors (J0, J45). Repeatability was assessed based on intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreement was evaluated by linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman analysis by calculating the mean difference and 95% limits of agreement (LoA). RESULTS: Assessment of intraoperator repeatability by means of ICC showed excellent reproducibility of measurements for both devices and all parameters examined ranging from 0.994 to 1.0. IOLMaster 700 exhibited significantly higher Kmean (p<0.001) and AL (p<0.001) values than the Pentacam AXL. Pentacam AXL showed significantly higher ACD (p<0.001) measurements than IOLMaster 700. There was no statistically significant difference of J0 (p=0.115) and J45 (p=0.255) values between Pentacam AXL and IOLMaster 700. CONCLUSIONS: Both devices provide high reproducible values for all parameters investigated. J0 and J45 values are statistically and clinically interchangeable between Pentacam AXL and IOLMaster 700. All other parameters are statistically different. In clinical practice, the differences for ACD and AL are to small and the values can be used interchangeable. However, Kmean values are clinically and statistically different and cannot be used interchangeable between the two devices.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the repeatability and comparability of biometry parameters between a Scheimpflug-based topography with axial length measurement (PentacamAXL, Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) and a swept-source optical biometry (IOLMaster 700, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany). METHODS: A total of 50 eyes from 50 adult subjects had biometry measurements in one session three times using the PentacamAXL and the IOLMaster 700. Keratometry, anterior chamber depth (ACD) and axial length (AL) values were obtained by both devices. Mean keratometry (Kmean) was calculated and the corneal spherocylinder was converted into power vectors (J0, J45). Repeatability was assessed based on intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreement was evaluated by linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman analysis by calculating the mean difference and 95% limits of agreement (LoA). RESULTS: Assessment of intraoperator repeatability by means of ICC showed excellent reproducibility of measurements for both devices and all parameters examined ranging from 0.994 to 1.0. IOLMaster 700 exhibited significantly higher Kmean (p<0.001) and AL (p<0.001) values than the PentacamAXL. PentacamAXL showed significantly higher ACD (p<0.001) measurements than IOLMaster 700. There was no statistically significant difference of J0 (p=0.115) and J45 (p=0.255) values between PentacamAXL and IOLMaster 700. CONCLUSIONS: Both devices provide high reproducible values for all parameters investigated. J0 and J45 values are statistically and clinically interchangeable between PentacamAXL and IOLMaster 700. All other parameters are statistically different. In clinical practice, the differences for ACD and AL are to small and the values can be used interchangeable. However, Kmean values are clinically and statistically different and cannot be used interchangeable between the two devices.
Authors: Henrique Aragão Arruda; Joana M Pereira; Arminda Neves; Maria João Vieira; Joana Martins; João C Sousa Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-01-14 Impact factor: 4.379