scholarly journals Comparison of central corneal thickness: ultrasound pachymetry versus slit-lamp optical coherence tomography, specular microscopy, and Orbscan

2015 ◽  
pp. 1065 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kakarla Chalam ◽  
Wassia Khaja ◽  
Sandeep Grover ◽  
Amy Kelmenson ◽  
Lee Ferguson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Optical Coherence Tomography ◽  
Central Corneal Thickness ◽  
Corneal Thickness ◽  
Specular Microscopy ◽  
Optical Coherence ◽  
Slit Lamp ◽  
Ultrasound Pachymetry

scholarly journals Study of central corneal thickness using non-contact techniques: Specular microscopy (Nidek CEM-530), corneal tomography (Pentacam HR), and optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT 5000) in healthy adult patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-31
Author(s):  
Patricia González-Rodríguez ◽  
Vanesa Blázquez-Sánchez ◽  
Sara Fernández-Cuenca
Keyword(s):  
Optical Coherence Tomography ◽  
Central Corneal Thickness ◽  
Healthy Adult ◽  
Adult Population ◽  
Corneal Thickness ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Specular Microscopy ◽  
Optical Coherence ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Corneal Tomography

Objective: To study and compare the value of central corneal thickness in a healthy adult population, using different non-contact techniques from daily clinical practice. Method: This work examines and compares the pachymetric measurements of 71 eyes of 36 healthy adult patients. Corneal thickness was evaluated using three non-contact instruments: a CEM-530 specular microscope (Nidek), Pentacam HR corneal tomography (Oculus), and Cirrus HD-OCT 5000 optical coherence tomography (Carl Zeiss Meditec). Tests were performed consecutively by a single observer in the same session and under the same environmental conditions. Results: The results obtained using the three devices are interchangeable, given that no statistically significant difference was observed among them. The study did not find statistically significant difference with respect to gender either. Conclusion: These three non-contact methods for the measurement of corneal central pachymetry are a reliable alternative to ultrasonic contact pachymetry.

scholarly journals Comparison of Central Corneal Thickness Measurements between Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography, Ultrasound Pachymetry and Ocular Biometry

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
E. Pateras ◽  
A. I. Kouroupaki
Keyword(s):  
Optical Coherence Tomography ◽  
Central Corneal Thickness ◽  
Corneal Thickness ◽  
Repeated Measurements ◽  
Optical Coherence ◽  
Swept Source ◽  
Ocular Biometry ◽  
Significant Linear Correlation ◽  
Ultrasound Pachymetry ◽  
The Mean

Purpose: To compare central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements and their reproducibility when taken by Ultrasound Pachymetry, Ocular Biometry and Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT). Methods: Twenty-five healthy volunteers were recruited creating a sample size of 50 eyes. All subjects had pachymetric measurements by Ultrasound pachymetry (PachPen Handheld Pachymeter, Keeler Instruments Inc), Ocular biometry (IOL Master 700 Swept Source Biometry, Zeiss) and Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography (Optovue Avanti RTVue XR Angiovue). The measurements of central corneal thickness for the three devices were taken by the same examiner twice for more accuracy. Results: The average measurements of central corneal thickness by Ultrasound pachymetry (PachPen Handheld Pachymeter, Keeler Instruments Inc), Ocular biometry (IOL Master 700 Swept Source Biometry, Zeiss) and Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography (Optovue Avanti RTVue XR Angiovue) were 547.26 μm, 551.36 μm, and 536.42 μm, respectively. The mean standard deviation (SD) of repeated measurements by Ocular biometry was 48.87 μm, which was greater than the mean SD of 44.24 μm and 40.35 μm (P < 0.001) by ultrasound pachymetry and Angiovue optical coherence tomography, respectively. There were statistically significant differences in the measurement results among the 3 methods (Ultrasound pachymetry vs. Ocular biometry P = 0.019; Ultrasound pachymetry vs. Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography; P < 0.001; Ocular biometry vs. Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography P < 0.001). There was a significant linear correlation between the Ultrasound pachymetry and Ocular biometry (r = 0.945, P<0.001), Ultrasound pachymetry and Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography (r = 0.895, P<0.001), and Ocular biometry and Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography (r = 0.902, P<0.001). Conclusion: Central corneal thickness readings were comparable between PachPen Handheld Pachymeter, IOL Master 700 Biometry and Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography; Angiovue optical coherence tomography gave significantly smaller values. The measurements of the 3 methods showed significant linear correlations with one another. All methods provided acceptable repeatability of measurements.

Comparative Study of Central Corneal Thickness Measurement with Slit-Lamp Optical Coherence Tomography and Visante Optical Coherence Tomography

Ophthalmology ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 115 (5) ◽  
pp. 796-801.e2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haitao Li ◽  
Christopher Kai Shun Leung ◽  
Lee Wong ◽  
Carol Yim Lui Cheung ◽  
Chi Pui Pang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Optical Coherence Tomography ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Central Corneal Thickness ◽  
Corneal Thickness ◽  
Thickness Measurement ◽  
Optical Coherence ◽  
Slit Lamp
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document