Su Po-Fang, Lo Andy Y, Hu Chao-Yu, Chang Shu-Wen
Department of Ophthalmology, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, Ban-Chiao, Taipei, Taiwan.
Optom Vis Sci. 2008 Dec;85(12):1193-200. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e31818e8ceb.
To compare anterior chamber depth (ACD) measurements using two non-contact optical devices, Pentacam and IOLMaster, and a contact device, ultrasonic A-scan in phakic and pseudophakic eyes.
Ninety phakic and 94 pseudophakic eyes were enrolled in this prospective study. The difference between ACD measurements by the three devices was analyzed using the repeated-measures analysis of variance, and agreement among the three measurements was investigated. The accuracy of detecting the anterior lens surface of the intraocular lens (IOL) with or without blue-blocker was also assessed.
In phakic eyes, the Pentacam measured the deepest ACD with the smallest standard deviation (3.26 +/- 0.41, 3.20 +/- 0.45, and 3.12 +/- 0.44 mm measured by Pentacam, IOLMaster, and A-scan, respectively, p < 0.001). In contrast, the Pentacam measurement of ACD had the largest standard deviation in pseudophakic eyes (4.05 +/- 0.58, 4.06 +/- 0.46, and 3.81 +/- 0.41 mm by Pentacam, IOLMaster, and A-scan, respectively, p < 0.001). The Pentacam instrument failed to correctly identify the anterior lens surface in 26.4% of IOLs without blue-blocker and in 58.5% of blue light-filtering IOLs (p = 0.016). Manual correction of the Pentacam image and subsequent ACD measurement improved the agreement between Pentacam and the other two devices. After manual adjustment, the average ACD value increased, and the standard deviation decreased significantly (4.34 +/- 0.28 mm).
ACD measurements by Pentacam, IOLMaster, and A-scan were in better agreement in phakic eyes when compared with pseudophakic eyes. In pseudophakic eyes, the 95% limits of agreements between Pentacam and IOLMaster as well as Pentacam and A-scan were unsatisfactory. IOLs with blue-blocker might interfere with ACD measurements. However, this error can be corrected manually in the Pentacam examination.
比较使用两种非接触式光学设备（Pentacam和IOLMaster）以及一种接触式设备（超声A超）测量有晶状体眼和人工晶状体眼的前房深度（ACD）。
90只具有晶状体眼和94只人工晶状体眼纳入了这项前瞻性研究。使用重复测量方差分析来分析三种设备测量的ACD之间的差异，并研究三种测量结果之间的一致性。还评估了有无蓝光阻断器时检测人工晶状体（IOL）前表面的准确性。
在有晶状体眼中，Pentacam测量的ACD最深，标准差最小（Pentacam、IOLMaster和A超测量的结果分别为3.26±0.41、3.20±0.45和3.12±0.44mm，p<0.001）。相比之下，在人工晶状体眼中，Pentacam测量的ACD标准差最大（Pentacam、IOLMaster和A超测量的结果分别为4.05±0.58、4.06±0.46和3.81±0.41mm，p<0.001）。在26.4%的无蓝光阻断器的IOL和58.5%的蓝光滤过IOL中，Pentacam仪器未能正确识别IOL的前表面（p = 0.016）。手动校正Pentacam图像并随后测量ACD可改善Pentacam与其他两种设备之间的一致性。手动调整后，平均ACD值增加，标准差显著降低（4.34±0.28mm）。
与人工晶状体眼相比，Pentacam、IOLMaster和A超测量有晶状体眼的ACD时一致性更好。在人工晶状体眼中，Pentacam与IOLMaster以及Pentacam与A超之间的95%一致性界限并不理想。带有蓝光阻断器的IOL可能会干扰ACD测量。然而，在Pentacam检查中可通过手动进行校正此误差。
