Suppr超能文献

通过共聚焦显微镜、超声和扫描裂隙法测量角膜厚度。

Corneal thickness measurement by confocal microscopy, ultrasound, and scanning slit methods.

作者信息

McLaren Jay W, Nau Cherie B, Erie Jay C, Bourne William M

机构信息

Department of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA.

出版信息

Am J Ophthalmol. 2004 Jun;137(6):1011-20. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2004.01.049.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To measure corneal thickness by using a calibrated confocal microscope and to compare this measurement to thickness determined by ultrasonic and noncontact scanning slit pachymetry.

DESIGN

Comparison of corneal thickness measured by using four instruments in normal subjects.

METHODS

Thickness measured by a clinical confocal microscope (Tandem Scanning) was calibrated from measurements of polymethylmethacrylate contact lenses with known thickness. Corneal thickness was measured in one eye of 24 normal subjects by using this instrument, two ultrasonic pachymeters (DHG-1000 and Sonogage), and a noncontact optical scanning slit pachymeter (Orbscan II).

RESULTS

Mean corneal thickness measured by confocal microscopy was 516 +/- 30 microm (+/-SD). This was less than the mean thickness measured by both ultrasonic pachymeters, 554 +/- 28 microm by the DGH, and 555 +/- 28 microm by the Sonogage (P <.001). Thickness measured by the Orbscan II pachymeter was 540 +/- 35 microm (P <.001, compared with either confocal or ultrasound) after applying an "acoustic factor" of 0.92, a default correction of the software.

CONCLUSION

Corneal thickness measured by calibrated confocal microscopy is approximately 39 microm (7.0%) less than thickness measured by two commonly used ultrasonic pachymeters and approximately 24 microm (4.4%) less than thickness measured by the corrected Orbscan II pachymeter. These differences are important for planning and measuring the effects of refractive and other surgical procedures. The precision of confocal microscopy is limited by corneal motion in an anterior-posterior direction. The difference between instruments suggests that verification of clinical ultrasonic pachymeters should be revisited.

摘要

目的

使用校准后的共焦显微镜测量角膜厚度,并将该测量结果与通过超声和非接触式扫描裂隙测厚法确定的厚度进行比较。

设计

对正常受试者使用四种仪器测量的角膜厚度进行比较。

方法

通过临床共焦显微镜(串联扫描)测量的厚度,根据已知厚度的聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯隐形眼镜的测量结果进行校准。使用该仪器、两台超声测厚仪(DHG - 1000和Sonogage)以及一台非接触式光学扫描裂隙测厚仪(Orbscan II),对24名正常受试者的一只眼睛进行角膜厚度测量。

结果

共焦显微镜测量的平均角膜厚度为516±30微米(±标准差)。这低于两台超声测厚仪测量的平均厚度,DGH为554±28微米。Sonogage为555±28微米(P<.001)。在应用软件默认校正的“声学因子”0.92后,Orbscan II测厚仪测量的厚度为540±35微米(与共焦或超声测量相比,P<.001)。

结论

校准后的共焦显微镜测量的角膜厚度比两台常用超声测厚仪测量的厚度约薄39微米(7.0%),比校正后的Orbscan II测厚仪测量的厚度约薄24微米(4.4%)。这些差异对于规划和测量屈光及其他手术操作的效果很重要。共焦显微镜的精度受角膜前后方向运动的限制。仪器之间的差异表明应重新审视临床超声测厚仪的验证问题。

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