Xiuyuan Li1,2, Pingjun Chang1,2, Zhangliang Li1,2, Shuyi Qian1,2, Zehui Zhu1,2, Qianwei Wang1,2, Zhao Yun-E1,2. 1. Eye Hospital and School of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Wenzhou Medical University , Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China. 2. National Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases , Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the agreement between a new UBM and a SS-OCT. METHODS: The scans of the right eye of each volunteer were obtained using the 2 devices. Data were fitted and recorded including: central corneal thickness (CCT), aqueous depth (AQD) (the distance from endothelium to lens), angle-to-angle distance (ATA), lens thickness (LT), diameter of the lens in the horizontal direction (LDiaangle: distance between the sharp angles on both sides of the lens, LDiaarc: distance between the vertex of the circular arcs on both sides of the lens), anterior and posterior corneal radius (Rf and Rb). RESULTS: 25 eyes were included in this study. It could be seen that the differences in CCT, LDiaangle, Rf measured by the two instruments were not statistically significant. Bland-Altman analysis plots of CCT, LDiaangle and Rf showed mean differences of 0.2 µm, 0.01 mm and 0.0 mm for the 2 devices respectively. CONCLUSION: The values of CCT, LDiaangle and Rf obtained via 2 instruments were not clinically interchangeable and the AQD, ATA, LT and Rb have poor agreement affected by accommodation. We can estimate the real lens diameter by subtracting 0.61 ± 0.43mm when the lens diameter can only be simulated with SS-OCT.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the agreement between a new UBM and a SS-OCT. METHODS: The scans of the right eye of each volunteer were obtained using the 2 devices. Data were fitted and recorded including: central corneal thickness (CCT), aqueous depth (AQD) (the distance from endothelium to lens), angle-to-angle distance (ATA), lens thickness (LT), diameter of the lens in the horizontal direction (LDiaangle: distance between the sharp angles on both sides of the lens, LDiaarc: distance between the vertex of the circular arcs on both sides of the lens), anterior and posterior corneal radius (Rf and Rb). RESULTS: 25 eyes were included in this study. It could be seen that the differences in CCT, LDiaangle, Rf measured by the two instruments were not statistically significant. Bland-Altman analysis plots of CCT, LDiaangle and Rf showed mean differences of 0.2 µm, 0.01 mm and 0.0 mm for the 2 devices respectively. CONCLUSION: The values of CCT, LDiaangle and Rf obtained via 2 instruments were not clinically interchangeable and the AQD, ATA, LT and Rb have poor agreement affected by accommodation. We can estimate the real lens diameter by subtracting 0.61 ± 0.43mm when the lens diameter can only be simulated with SS-OCT.