Suppr超能文献

超声检查、Orbscan II和IOLMaster对前房深度的比较评估

Comparative estimation of anterior chamber depth by ultrasonography, Orbscan II, and IOLMaster.

作者信息

Reddy Aravind R, Pande Milind V, Finn Paul, El-Gogary Hazem

机构信息

Leeds Teaching Hospitals, University of Teesside, Middlesbrough, England, United Kingdom.

出版信息

J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004 Jun;30(6):1268-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2003.11.053.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To assess the degree of agreement of anterior chamber depth (ACD) measurements by 2 optical devices (Orbscan II and IOLMaster) and compare them with contact ultrasound A-scan.

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology at Hull Royal Infirmary, England. methods: In this prospective study of 81 eyes of 41 consecutive patients, ACD estimation was done by 3 methods-scanning slit topography (Orbscan II), partial coherence interferometry (IOLMaster), and contact ultrasound A-scan in that order. The same observer performed all measurements. Repeated measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze difference between ACD measurements by the 3 methods. Difference in measurements between methods was assessed using the paired t test.

RESULTS

The mean ACD (+/-SD) by the 3 methods was 3.32 mm (0.60), 3.33 mm (0.61), and 2.87 mm (0.55), respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between measurements recorded by the 3 methods (P<.01). Mean contact A-scan measurements were 0.40 mm and 0.43 mm lower than by Orbscan II and IOLMaster respectively (P<.01).

CONCLUSION

Applanation ultrasound gives consistently lower measurements for ACD compared to Orbscan II and IOLMaster. Although a high degree of agreement between Orbscan II and IOLMaster was noted, further studies are needed to assess the interchangeability of measurements in clinical practice.

摘要

目的

评估两种光学设备(Orbscan II和IOLMaster)测量前房深度(ACD)的一致性程度,并将其与接触式超声A超进行比较。

设置

英国赫尔皇家医院眼科。

方法

在这项对41例连续患者的81只眼进行的前瞻性研究中,按顺序采用三种方法估计ACD,即扫描裂隙地形图法(Orbscan II)、部分相干干涉测量法(IOLMaster)和接触式超声A超。所有测量均由同一名观察者进行。采用重复测量方差分析(ANOVA)分析三种方法测量ACD的差异。使用配对t检验评估方法之间测量值的差异。

结果

三种方法测得的平均ACD(±标准差)分别为3.32mm(0.60)、3.33mm(0.61)和2.87mm(0.55)。三种方法记录的测量值之间存在统计学显著差异(P<0.01)。接触式A超的平均测量值分别比Orbscan II和IOLMaster低0.40mm和0.43mm(P<0.01)。

结论

与Orbscan II和IOLMaster相比,压平式超声测量的ACD值始终较低。尽管Orbscan II和IOLMaster之间显示出高度一致性,但仍需要进一步研究以评估临床实践中测量值的互换性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验