Purpose: This study examines agreement between the devices Anterion® and Pentacam HR® used for corneal and pupil measurements in healthy eyes.
Methods: The parameters compared between the two devices were: anterior Km (D), anterior K2 (D), anterior K1 (D), anterior K1 axis (°), anterior astigmatism (D), anterior K max (D), posterior Km (D), posterior K2 (D), posterior K1 (D), posterior K1 axis (°), posterior astigmatism (D), CCT (μm), thinnest point thickness (μm), thinnest point X‐coordinate (mm), thinnest point Y‐coordinate (mm), pupil diameter (mm), pupil center‐corneal vertex distance (mm) (angle kappa), pupil centroid angle (°), pupil centroid X‐coordinate (mm), and pupil centroid Y‐coordinate (mm).
Results: The Student's t test for independent samples identified significant differences (p < 0.05) between devices for the measurements anterior and posterior flat K axis, posterior flat K, steep K, and mean K. For these last three measurements, although significant, none of the differences were clinically relevant. Corneal power and thickness measurements except Kf axis showed excellent agreement between Anterion and Pentacam. Pupil diameter differed significantly between both groups (p < 0.05).
Conclusions: In a clinical setting we would not recommend the interchangeable use of Pentacam and Anterion for measurement of pupil parameters.
Purpose: To assess agreement between corneal aberration measurements made through swept‐source optical coherence tomography using a new anterior segment imaging device (Anterion) and a Scheimpflug imaging device (Pentacam HR) in healthy subjects.
Methods: Cross‐sectional study. In 50 eyes of 50 healthy subjects, 14 aberration parameters (7 across the anterior corneal surface and 7 across the total surface) were measured in 4 mm and 6 mm optic zones using each device: oblique trefoil (Z3_‐3), vertical coma (Z3_‐1), horizontal coma (Z3_1), horizontal trefoil (Z3_3), spherical aberration (Z4_0), root mean square (RMS) lower order aberrations (LOA) and RMS higher order aberrations (HOA). Data for the two devices were compared through intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), paired t tests, limits of agreement (LoA) and Bland Altman plots.
Results: Vertical coma was the only corneal aberration parameter that consistently showed excellent agreement (ICC > 0.8, mean difference −0.019, LoA −0.165 to 0.126). Good agreement (ICC = 0.75) between the devices was observed for RMS HOA, but this was slightly worse in the 6 mm optical zone (ICC = 0.667 for anterior RMS HOA). No over‐ or underestimation trend by one or other device was noted. Agreement was poor to moderate for the rest of the corneal parameters (ICC 0.2–0.7).
Conclusions: Despite good agreement overall for vertical coma and RMS HOA values, agreement for the remaining corneal aberration measurements was poor to moderate. As mean differences in our sample were overall small, in normal eyes these devices could be clinically judged as interchangeable.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.