Rainer Georg, Findl Oliver, Petternel Vanessa, Kiss Barbara, Drexler Wolfgang, Skorpik Christian, Georgopoulos Michael, Schmetterer Leopold
Department of Ophthalmology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Ophthalmology. 2004 May;111(5):875-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2003.09.027.
To compare the reliability of central corneal thickness measurements (CCT) obtained with partial coherence interferometry (PCI), ultrasound pachymetry, and the Orbscan system.
Cross-sectional study.
Twenty healthy subjects with CCT measurements in both eyes.
The CCT measurements were obtained with PCI, ultrasound pachymetry, and the Orbscan system. In each eye, 2 investigators performed 5 repeated measurements with each pachymetric device. Intraclass correlation coefficients (kappa) were calculated and mean CCT measurements were compared.
The CCT measurements obtained with ultrasound pachymetry, the Orbscan system (Orbtek Inc., Salt Lake City, UT), and PCI.
Mean CCT values measured with ultrasound pachymetry were significantly thicker than those measured with PCI (21.5 microm; P<0.001) or the Orbscan system (19.8 microm; P<0.001). The correlation coefficients for the intraobserver variability were 0.999 for PCI measurements, 0.983 for ultrasound pachymetry measurements, and 0.988 for Orbscan system measurements. The correlation coefficients for the interobserver variability were 0.998 for PCI measurements, 0.980 for ultrasound pachymetry measurements, and 0.988 for Orbscan system measurements. There was a slightly better consistency between ultrasound pachymetry and PCI (kappa = 0.96) than between the Orbscan system and PCI (kappa = 0.92) and between ultrasound pachymetry and the Orbscan system (kappa = 0.89).
Partial coherence interferometry was the method with the least intraobserver or interobserver variability. Mean CCT as measured with ultrasound pachymetry was approximately 20 microm thicker than with the Orbscan system and PCI. However, corneal thickness measurements with ultrasound pachymetry and PCI were slightly more consistent than those of the Orbscan system and PCI. This slightly better consistency, however, may be important, especially in corneal refractive surgery.
比较使用部分相干干涉测量法(PCI)、超声测厚法和Orbscan系统测量中央角膜厚度(CCT)的可靠性。
横断面研究。
20名双眼均进行了CCT测量的健康受试者。
使用PCI、超声测厚法和Orbscan系统进行CCT测量。在每只眼睛中,2名研究人员使用每种测厚设备进行5次重复测量。计算组内相关系数(kappa)并比较平均CCT测量值。
使用超声测厚法、Orbscan系统(Orbtek公司,犹他州盐湖城)和PCI获得的CCT测量值。
超声测厚法测量的平均CCT值显著厚于PCI测量值(厚21.5微米;P<0.001)或Orbscan系统测量值(厚19.8微米;P<0.001)。观察者内变异性的相关系数,PCI测量为0.999,超声测厚法测量为0.983,Orbscan系统测量为0.988。观察者间变异性的相关系数,PCI测量为0.998,超声测厚法测量为0.980,Orbscan系统测量为0.988。超声测厚法与PCI之间的一致性(kappa = 0.96)略优于Orbscan系统与PCI之间的一致性(kappa = 0.92)以及超声测厚法与Orbscan系统之间的一致性(kappa = 0.89)。
部分相干干涉测量法是观察者内或观察者间变异性最小的方法。超声测厚法测量的平均CCT比Orbscan系统和PCI测量的厚约20微米。然而,超声测厚法和PCI测量角膜厚度的一致性略高于Orbscan系统和PCI。不过,这种略好的一致性可能很重要,尤其是在角膜屈光手术中。