Literature DB >> 29634372

Comparison of Central Corneal Thickness Measured by Standard Ultrasound Pachymetry, Corneal Topography, Tono-Pachymetry and Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography.

Javier González-Pérez1, Juan Queiruga Piñeiro2, Ángelx Sánchez García1, José Manuel González Méijome1,3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare central corneal thickness (CCT) measured by standard ultrasound pachymetry (USP), and three non-contact devices in healthy eyes.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study of CCT measurement in 52 eyes of 52 healthy volunteers was done by a single examiner at Ocular Surface and Contact Lens Laboratory. Three consecutive measurements were done by standard USP, non-contact tono-pachymeter, Pentacam corneal topographer, and Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography (AS-OCT). The mean values were used for assessment. The results were compared using multivariate ANOVA, linear regression, and Pearson correlation. Agreement among the devices was analyzed using mean differences and Bland-Altman analysis with 95% limits of agreement (LoA). Finally, reliability was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
RESULTS: Mean CCT by ultrasound pachymeter, tono-pachymeter, corneal topographer and AS-OCT were 558.9 ± 31.2 µm, 525.8 ± 43.1 µm, 550.4 ± 30.5 µm, and 545.9 ± 30.5 µm respectively. There was a significant positive correlation between AS-OCT and USP (Pearson correlation = 0.957, p < 0.001), corneal topography and USP (Pearson correlation = 0.965, p < 0.001), and corneal topography and AS-OCT (Pearson correlation = 0.965, p < 0.001). There was a lower correlation between CT-1P tono-pachymeter and the other three modalities. Intraclass correlation coefficients show an excellent reliability between pairs except for CT-1P against the other three instruments that were found moderate.
CONCLUSIONS: CT-1P tono-pachymeter underestimates CCT measurements compared to Scheimpflug system, AS-OCT device, and USP. Mean CCT among USP, Pentacam and AS-OCT were comparable and had significant linear correlations. In clinical practice, these three modalities could be interchangeable in healthy patients.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Central corneal thickness; Scheimpflug camera; anterior segment optical coherence tomography; interchangeability; non-contact tono-pachymetry; ultrasound pachymetry

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29634372     DOI: 10.1080/02713683.2018.1461910

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Eye Res        ISSN: 0271-3683            Impact factor:   2.424


  6 in total

1.  Monitoring of central corneal thickness after phacoemulsification-comparison of statical and rotating Scheimpflug pachymetry, and spectral-domain OCT.

Authors:  Daniel M Handzel; Carsten H Meyer; Alfred Wegener
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-08-18       Impact factor: 1.645

2.  Correlation between corneal thickness, keratometry, age, and differential pressure difference in healthy eyes.

Authors:  Ahmet Colakoglu; Iffet Emel Colakoglu; Cemile Banu Cosar
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-02-18       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Central Corneal Thickness Measurements with Different Imaging Devices: Ultrasound Pachymetry, Noncontact Specular Microscopy, and Tono-Pachymetry.

Authors:  Ali Ceylan; Irem Onal; Burak Mergen; Yusuf Yildirim
Journal:  Beyoglu Eye J       Date:  2022-02-18

4.  Comparison of Six Methods of Central Corneal Thickness Measurement in Healthy Eyes.

Authors:  Turgay Ucak; Erel Icel; Nurdan Gamze Tasli; Yucel Karakurt; Hayati Yilmaz; Adem Ugurlu; Mehmet Demir
Journal:  Beyoglu Eye J       Date:  2021-02-12

5.  Comparison of radius of anterior lens surface curvature measurements in vivo using the anterior segment optical coherence tomography and Scheimpflug imaging.

Authors:  Zhenzhen Liu; Xiaoting Ruan; Wei Wang; Juzi Liu; Yijing Meng; Xiaoxun Gu; Jun Fu; Lixia Luo; Yizhi Liu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-03

6.  Comparison of corneal thickness in patients with dry eye disease using the Pentacam rotating Scheimpflug camera and anterior segment optical coherence tomography.

Authors:  Keiichi Fujimoto; Takenori Inomata; Yuichi Okumura; Nanami Iwata; Kenta Fujio; Atsuko Eguchi; Ken Nagino; Hurramhon Shokirova; Maria Karasawa; Akira Murakami
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-02-03       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.