Comparison of Central Corneal Thickness Measurement Using Ultrasonic Pachymetry, Rotating Scheimpflug Camera, and Scanning-Slit Topography

Purpose To evaluate and compare central corneal thickness measurements using rotating Scheimpflug camera, scanning-slit topography, and ultrasound pachymetry in virgin, healthy corneas. Design Prospective, observational, cross-sectional study. Methods Central corneal thickness in 157 healthy eyes of...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:American journal of ophthalmology 2010-12, Vol.150 (6), p.780-789
Main Authors: Sedaghat, Mohammad Reza, Daneshvar, Ramin, Kargozar, Abbas, Derakhshan, Akbar, Daraei, Mona
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Anthropometry
Biological and medical sciences
Cornea - anatomy & histology
Corneal Topography
Cross-Sectional Studies
Diagnostic Techniques, Ophthalmological
Female
Humans
Male
Medical sciences
Miscellaneous
Ophthalmology
Photography
Prospective Studies
Reference Values
Reproducibility of Results
Ultrasonography
Young Adult
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose To evaluate and compare central corneal thickness measurements using rotating Scheimpflug camera, scanning-slit topography, and ultrasound pachymetry in virgin, healthy corneas. Design Prospective, observational, cross-sectional study. Methods Central corneal thickness in 157 healthy eyes of 157 patients without ocular abnormalities other than refractive errors was measured, in a sequential order, once with rotating Scheimpflug camera and scanning-slit topography and 3 times with ultrasound pachymetry as the last part of examination. All measurements were performed by a single experienced examiner. The results from scanning-slit topography are given with and without correction for “acoustic correction factor” of 0.92. Results The average measurements of central corneal thickness by rotating Scheimpflug imaging, scanning-slit pachymetry, and ultrasound were 537.15 ± 32.98 μm, 542.06 ± 39.04 μm, and 544.07 ± 34.75 μm, respectively. The mean differences between modalities were 6.92 μm between rotating Scheimpflug and ultrasound ( P < .0001), 2.01 μm between corrected scanning-slit and ultrasound ( P = .204), and 4.91 μm between corrected scanning-slit and rotating Scheimpflug imaging ( P = .001). According to Bland-Altman analysis, highest agreement was between ultrasonic and rotating Scheimpflug pachymetry. Conclusions In the assessment of normal corneas, rotating Scheimpflug topography measures central corneal thickness values with higher agreement to ultrasound pachymetry.
ISSN:0002-9394
1879-1891
DOI:10.1016/j.ajo.2010.06.013