Repeatability and Agreement of Central Corneal Thickness and Keratometry Measurements between Four Different Devices

Kiraly, Laszlo; Stange, Jana; Kunert, Kathleen S.; Sel, Saadettin

doi:10.1155/2017/6181405

Cited by 36 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Chang et al 4 compared the astigmatic measurements obtained with Pentacam and IOL Master and did not find statistically significant differences between devices in the measurement of the magnitude of corneal astigmatism. Kiraly et al 31 reported significantly higher values of corneal J 0 with Pentacam compared to IOL-Master, with no significant differences between devices for J 45 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Specifically, the absolute value of this power vector component was higher when measured with IOL-Master compared to the Pentacam system. Comparisons between Cassini versus Pentacam, 10,30 and also between Pentacam and IOL-Master 4,31 have been previously performed. Apparently contradictory conclusions/results have been reported, although the ranges of agreement are consistent with those obtained in the current study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative analysis of anterior corneal curvature and astigmatism measurements obtained with three different devices

Molina‐Martín

Piñero

Caballero

et al. 2020

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The objective of this study was to compare the central corneal curvature and astigmatism measurements obtained with three different systems in healthy eyes and to assess the level of interchangeability between them. Methods This was a comparative study examining 30 healthy eyes of 30 patients (age 15–53 years). A complete eye examination was performed in all cases including analysis of anterior corneal curvature and astigmatism with three devices: the colour‐LED topography system Cassini (i‐Optics) (CAS), the Scheimpflug‐based system Pentacam (Oculus Optikgeräte) (PTC) and the optical biometer IOL‐Master 500 (Carl Zeiss Meditec) (IOLM). Differences between devices in terms of curvature in the flattest (flat K) and steepest meridians (steep K) as well as in the magnitude (AST) and power vector components of astigmatism (J0 and J45) were evaluated. The interchangeability between devices was evaluated with the Bland–Altman method. Results Statistically significant differences between devices were found in steep K and flat K (p < 0.001). No statistically significant differences between devices were found in AST (p = 0.057) and J0 power vector (p = 0.185). However, differences between devices in J45 did reach statistical significance (p = 0.039). Ranges of agreement for curvature measures ranged from 0.123 (flat K, CAS‐PTC) to 0.165 mm (steep K, CAS‐PTC). Ranges for the magnitude of astigmatism were 0.868, 1.059 and 0.739 D in CAS‐IOLM, PTC‐IOLM and CAS‐PTC comparisons, respectively. For J0 and J45, ranges of agreement were below 0.522 D. Conclusions Measurements of central corneal curvature and astigmatism obtained with the three devices evaluated cannot be used interchangeably.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative analysis of anterior corneal curvature and astigmatism measurements obtained with three different devices

Molina‐Martín

Piñero

Caballero

et al. 2020

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Revo NX is the latter type. Contrary to most OCT machines with add on lens that measure only anterior curvature, [6] it is cable of generating anterior and posterior corneal surface maps with respective keratometry. Measuring posterior corneal power is vital in keratoconic patients and in IOL calculation [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reproducibility, and repeatability of corneal topography measured by Revo NX, Galilei G6 and Casia 2 in normal eyes

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo test the repeatability and reproducibility of the topography module in posterior segment spectral domain optical coherence tomography with Revo NX (new device) and to compare keratometry values obtained by a Scheimpflug tomography (Galilei G6) and a swept source OCT (Casia 2). MethodsIn this prospective study, healthy subjects with nonoperated eyes had their central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior and posterior K1/K2 corneal power measured with the new device. Two operators made 6 measurements on the new device to check intraobserver repeatability and reproducibility, and measurement on Casia 2 and Galilei G6. Bland-Altman plots were used to assess the agreement between the devices for each analyzed variable. Results94 eyes (94 patients) were studied. All devices produced significantly different mean CCT, the highest for Galilei 569.13±37.58 μm followed by Casia 545.00 ±36.15 μm and Revo 537.39±35.92 μm. The mean anterior K1 was 43.21 ± 1.37 for Casia 2 43.21 ± 1.55 for Revo NX and 43.19 ± 1.39 for Galilei G6, and the differences were insignificant p = 0.617. The posterior K1 for Revo NX was -5.77 ± 0.25 whereas for Casia 2 it was -5.98±0.22 and for Galilei G6-6.09±0.28 D p< 0.0001. The Revo NX showed intraclass correlation coefficient ranging from 0.975 for the posterior K2 surface, and 0.994 for anterior K1 and 0.998 for CCT. ConclusionsRevo NX is independent of the user and offers a high level of repeatability for the anterior and posterior cornea. The wide range of differences between the devices suggests they should not be used interchangeably.

show abstract

“…Kiraly et al . used Cirrus HD-OCT 5-line raster mode as well as Pentacam HR to estimate repeatability and comparability of the CCT measurements [ 34 ]. The mean difference between these methods was shown to be 11.44 µm, which was comparable to our maximum reported mean difference of 13.5 µm.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reproducibility of Central Corneal Thickness Measurements in Normal Eyes Using the Zeiss Cirrus 5000 HD-OCT and Pentacam HR

Baghdasaryan¹,

Huang²,

Marion³

et al. 2018

TOOPHTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:To determine the repeatability and reproducibility of Central Corneal Thickness (CCT) measurements using two different anterior segment imaging modalities, including those obtained with the new anterior segment lens attachments for the Cirrus 5000 HD-OCT.Methods:A total of 32 eyes from 16 normal volunteers (8 male, 8 female) were enrolled in this prospective study. CCT was measured by the same examiner using the Cirrus 5000 HD-OCT and Pentacam HR. The results of CCT obtained by each method were averaged and compared using t-test analysis. The agreement between the measurement methods was evaluated. Coefficient of Repeatability (CoR) and Intra-Class Correlation Coefficient (ICC) were computed.Results:The mean measurements taken with the Cirrus OCT anterior chamber lens (CCTAC), HD cornea lens (CCTHDC) and pachymetry scans (CCTPach) were 545.35 ± 31.02, 537.87 ± 26.82, and 532.04 ± 29.82 µm, respectively. The mean CCT obtained with the Pentacam (CCTPent) was 545.51 ± 30.71 µm. CCTPent were significantly higher than CCTHDC and CCTPach (p< 0.0001). In contrast, the CCTPent and CCTAC were similar (p=0.87). CCT, as evaluated by the two different instruments, showed excellent correlation (r > 0.98, p< 0.0001) with an ICC > 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97 – 0.99). CoR was the highest for CCTPach (3.7 ± 1.4, 95% CI (3.0- 4.6)).Conclusion:CCT measurements from the Cirrus OCT using the new anterior segment lens attachments and the Pentacam HR are highly correlated. This should allow the use of a standardized correction factor if necessary to inter-relate the measurements between the two devices.

show abstract

Repeatability and Agreement of Central Corneal Thickness and Keratometry Measurements between Four Different Devices

Cited by 36 publications

References 23 publications

Comparative analysis of anterior corneal curvature and astigmatism measurements obtained with three different devices

Comparative analysis of anterior corneal curvature and astigmatism measurements obtained with three different devices

Reproducibility, and repeatability of corneal topography measured by Revo NX, Galilei G6 and Casia 2 in normal eyes

Reproducibility of Central Corneal Thickness Measurements in Normal Eyes Using the Zeiss Cirrus 5000 HD-OCT and Pentacam HR

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About