Garza-Leon M, Plancarte-Lozano E, Del Valle-Penella A, Guzmán-Martínez ML, Villarreal-González A

Language: Spanish
References: 22
Page: 50-55
PDF size: 205.60 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background: Corneal pachymetry is widely used for refractive surgery and follow up in keratoconus, accurate measurement is essential for a safe surgery. Objective: To assess intraobserver reliability of central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements using optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR) technology and its agreement with ultrasonic pachymeter (US). Method: Randomized and prospective comparative evaluation of diagnostic technology. One randomly healthy eye of subjects was scanned three times with both devices. Intraobserver within-subject standard deviation (Sw), coefficient of variation (CVw) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were obtained for reliability analysis; for study agreement, data were analyzed using the paired-sample t test and the Bland-Altman LoA method. The mean of three scans of each equipment was used to assess the LoA. Results: The study enrolled 30 eyes of 30 subjects with average age of 28.70 ± 8.06 years. For repeatability, the Sw were 3.41 and 5.96 µ, the intraobserver CVw was 2 and 4% and ICC 0.991 and 0.988, for OLCR and US respectively. The mean CCT difference between OLCR and US was 8.90 ± 9.03 µ (95% confidence interval: 5.52-2.27 µ), and the LoA was 35.40 µ. Conclusions: OLCR technology provided reliable intraobserver CCT measurements. Both pachymetry measurements may be used interchangeably with minimum calibration adjustment.

REFERENCES

1. Chang AW, Tsang AC, Contreras JE, Huynh PD, Calvano CJ, Crnic-Rein TC, et al. Corneal tissue ablation depth and the Munnerlyn formula. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003;29:1204-10.

2. Wang SY, Melles R, Lin SC. The impact of central corneal thickness on the risk for glaucoma in a large multiethnic population. J Glaucoma. 2014; 23:606-12.

3. Steinberg J, Mehlan J, Frings A, Druchkiv V, Richard G, Katz T, et al. [Pachymetry and intraocular pressure measurement by corneal visualization Scheimpflug technology (Corvis ST): a clinical comparison to the gold standard.] Ophthalmologe. 2015;112:770-7.

4. Miglior S, Albe E, Guareschi M, Mandelli G, Gomarasca S, Orzalesi N. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility in the evaluation of ultrasonic pachymetry measurements of central corneal thickness. Br J Ophthalmol. 2004;88:174-7.

5. Bayhan HA, Aslan Bayhan S, Can I. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with three new optical devices and a standard ultrasonic pachymeter. Int J Ophthalmol. 2014;7:302-8.

6. Spadea L, Giammaria D, Di Genova L, Fiasca A. Comparison of optical low coherence reflectometry and ultrasound pachymetry in the measurement of central corneal thickness before and after photorefractive keratectomy. J Refract Surg. 2007;23 661-6.

7. Beutelspacher SC, Serbecic N, Scheuerle AF. Assessment of central corneal thickness using OCT, ultrasound, optical low coherence reflectometry and Scheimpflug pachymetry. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2011;21:132-7.

8. Shen P, Ding X, Congdon NG, Zheng Y, He M. Comparison of anterior ocular biometry between optical low-coherence reflectometry and anterior segment optical coherence tomography in an adult Chinese population. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012;38:966-70.

9. Chen W, McAlinden C, Pesudovs K, Wang Q, Lu F, Feng Y, et al. Scheimpflug-Placido topographer and optical low-coherence reflectometry biometer: repeatability and agreement. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012;38:1626-32.

10. López-Miguel A, Correa-Pérez ME, Miranda-Anta S, Iglesias-Cortinas D, Coco-Martín MB, Maldonado MJ. Comparison of central corneal thickness using optical low-coherence reflectometry and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012;38:758-64.

11. Huerva V, Ascaso FJ, Soldevila J, Lavilla L. Comparison of anterior segment measurements with optical low-coherence reflectometry and rotating dual Scheimpflug analysis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014; 40:1170-6.

12. Soeken TA, Apsey DA, Townley JR, Haas RW, Caldwell MC. Comparison of pachymetry measurements between the Alcon Wavelight EX500 and Sonogage Corneo-Gage Plus platforms. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015;31:328-32.

13. Read SA, Collins MJ. Diurnal variation of corneal shape and thickness. Optom Vis Sci. 2009;86:170-80.

14. Asensio I, Rahhal SM, Alonso L, Palanca-Sanfrancisco JM, Sanchís-Gimeno JA. Corneal thickness values before and after oxybuprocaine 0.4% eye drops. Cornea. 2003;22:527-32.

15. Herse P, Siu A. Short-term effects of proparacaine on human corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol. 1992;70:740-4.

16. Kramer MS, Feinstein AR. Clinical biostatistics. LIV. The biostatistics of concordance. Clin Pharmacol Therapeut. 1981;29:111-23.

17. Randleman JB, Trattler WB, Stulting RD. Validation of the Ectasia Risk Score System for preoperative laser in situ keratomileusis screening. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008;145:813-8.

18. Santhiago MR, Smadja D, Gomes BF, Mello GR, Monteiro ML, Wilson SE, et al. Association between the percent tissue altered and post-laser in situ keratomileusis ectasia in eyes with normal preoperative topography. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014;158:87-95.e81.

19. Ambrosio R Jr, Dawson DG, Belin MW. Association between the percent tissue altered and post-laser in situ keratomileusis ectasia in eyes with normal preoperative topography. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014;158:1358-9.

20. Munnerlyn CR, Koons SJ, Marshall J. Photorefractive keratectomy: a technique for laser refractive surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1988;14:46-52.

21. Tai LY, Khaw KW, Ng CM, Subrayan V. Central corneal thickness measurements with different imaging devices and ultrasound pachymetry. Cornea. 2013;32:766-71.

22. Koktekir BE, Gedik S, Bakbak B. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with optical low-coherence reflectometry and ultrasound pachymetry and reproducibility of both devices. Cornea. 2012;31:1278-81.