2016
DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.2183
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of In Vivo Confocal Microscopy, Ultrasonic Pachymetry, and Scheimpflug Topography for Measuring Central Corneal Thickness

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
2
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Comparisons of these data to clinical normal values on other instrumentation are also being performed. For example, a previous work found that confocal microscopy overestimates corneal thickness compared to OCT . Our data, on average, is in line with density measures by another research team using the CS4 instrument .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Comparisons of these data to clinical normal values on other instrumentation are also being performed. For example, a previous work found that confocal microscopy overestimates corneal thickness compared to OCT . Our data, on average, is in line with density measures by another research team using the CS4 instrument .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…2,[19][20][21] Comparisons of these data to clinical normal values on other instrumentation are also being performed. For example, a previous work found that confocal microscopy overestimates corneal thickness compared to OCT. 22 Our data, on average, is in line with density measures by another research team using the CS4 instrument. 3 This indicates that general concerns we have about data collection on this instrument such as the subject tiring are likely not impacting our results here in a meaningful way.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…There are different methods to measure corneal thickness, including ultrasound pachymetry, 6 confocal microscopy, 7 and slit scanning, Scheimpflug tomography. 8 9 The first two are contact methods that measure CCT at certain points and are associated with a possible risk of infection transmission.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%