Agreement between Central Corneal Thickness Measured Using Pentacam, Ultrasound Pachymetry, Specular Microscopy and Optic Biometer Lenstar LS 900 and the Influence of Intraocular Pressure

Abstract

Purpose: To compare central corneal thickness (CCT) values obtained by Lenstar (LE), Pentacam (PC), specular microscopy (SM) and ultrasound pachymetry (UP) in healthy corneas and study their influence on intraocular pressure (IOP) readings determined by Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT). Methods: CCT was measured in 76 healthy subjects by LE, PC, SM and UP. We established Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (ρ-C) between different techniques. The influence of CCT on GAT was established through univariate linear regression models, IOP being the dependent variable. Results: The highest ρ-C was found between LE and SM at 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91-0.96) and between LE and UP at 0.95 (95% CI: 0.94-0.97). IOP readings showed less variability when CCT was determined using LE (7.7%, B = 0.16; 95% CI: 0.004-0.28). Conclusions: Although CCT values obtained with UP, PC, SM and LE show good correlation, these methods are not completely interchangeable. The amount of IOP variation differs when CCT is determined using LE or SM.

The thick and thin of the central corneal thickness in glaucoma

“…Specular microscopy (e.g., Topcon SP-3000P, Topcon Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), optical coherence tomography, rotating Scheimpflug camera (e.g., Pentacam, Oculus Inc., Wetzlar, Germany), optical low-coherence reflectometry (e.g., Lenstar, Haag-Streit AG, Koeniz, Switzerland), and slitscanning optical pachymetry (OPT; e.g., Orbscan, Bausch & Lomb, Rochester, NY, USA) are other imaging techniques that are non-contact. Results from these OPT techniques are not interchangeable between devices and differ significantly compared with UP [1][2][3][4][5]; some devices overestimate [5,6], while others underestimate [4,7]. The presence of corneal haze and keratoconus may explain some differences in the measurements between devices [8,9].…”

Reproducibility and repeatability of central corneal thickness measurement in healthy eyes using four different optical devices

“…Advances in the diagnostic technologies and increased interest in corneal refractive surgical techniques resulted in the development of less invasive and noncontact methods for the measurement of the corneal thickness [8]. Since CCT measurements might be performed using many types of noncontact equipment, different types of equipments are available in different clinics.…”

Central corneal thickness measurements in phakic, pseudophakic, and aphakic children with ultrasound pachymetry and different non-contact devices

“…Non-contact measuring devices include Pentacam, partial coherence interferometry (PCI), and specular microscopy (SM) among others (5). They are easy to use for examiners and comfortable for children (7).…”