Comparison of Ultrasound and Scheimpflug Methods for Central Corneal Thickness.
Loading...
Date
2015
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Aim: The central corneal thickness (CCT) of healthy individuals was measured with an ultrasonic
pachymeter (UP) and the Scheimpflug imaging system (SIS) and the results were compared to
evaluate the agreement between the two methods in this study.
Materials and Methods: The 61 subjects who had no ocular pathology or systemic disease except
blepharitis were included in the study. CCT measurements of all subjects were performed with the
UP (Sonomed 300P Pacscan) and SIS (Nidek Optical biometer AL-Scan) devices and the results
were compared. The t test and the Bland-Altman plot were used as the statistical methods.
Results: The study sample consisted of 61 cases including 20 males and 41 females. The mean
age was 41.8±12.4 (20-58) years for the males and 46.2±9 (24-60) years for the females with no
statistically significant difference (P=0.116). The mean CCT measurement of all the 61 subjects
was 544.5±31 μm in the right eyes and 547.3±33 μm in the left eyes with UP, 530.7±27.6 μm in the
right eyes and 531.6±25.5 μm in the left eyes with SIS. The CCT in the SIS results was an average
of 13.8 μm thinner than the UP results in the right eye, 15.7 μm in the left eye and this difference was statistically significant (p=0.001 in right and left eyes). A high degree of agreement was found
between the two methods with the Bland-Altman plot.
Conclusion: A high degree of agreement was found between SIS and UP regarding CCT
measurements and the mean SIS results were 13.8 μm and 15.7 μm thinner than the UP results in
the right eyes and left eyes respectively.
Description
Keywords
Central corneal thickness, Scheimpflug imaging, ultrasonic pachymeter, glaucoma
Citation
Ersekerci Tulay Karacan, Kilic Rasit, Comcali Sebile Ustun, Cetin Abdi Bahadir, Cakmak Yasin. Comparison of Ultrasound and Scheimpflug Methods for Central Corneal Thickness. British Journal of Medicine and Medical Research. 2015; 8(8): 677-683.