• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

使用 Galilei、Orbscan II 和基于 Placido 盘的角膜地形图仪系统进行角膜断层测量的比较。

Comparison of corneal tomography measurements using Galilei, Orbscan II, and Placido disk-based topographer systems.

机构信息

Ophthalmic Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

J Refract Surg. 2011 Jul;27(7):502-8. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20101210-02. Epub 2010 Dec 15.

DOI:10.3928/1081597X-20101210-02
PMID:21188959
Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate agreement in keratometry readings and anterior and posterior elevation map measurements among the Galilei V4.01 (Ziemer), Orbscan IIz (Bausch & Lomb), and Corneal Map topographer (Costruzione Strumenti Oftalmici) systems.

METHODS

This prospective comparative study comprised 184 eyes of 92 consecutive refractive surgery candidates who were simultaneously examined with the Galilei (dual Scheimpflug), Orbscan II (scanning-slit), and Corneal Map topographer (Placido disk-based) systems. Keratometry readings and anterior and posterior elevation map measurements were compared using analysis of variance and paired t test, respectively.

RESULTS

Mean keratometry reading was 44.30 ± 1.49 diopters (D), 44.11 ± 1.47 D, and 44.60 ± 1.56 D with the Galilei, Orbscan, and Corneal Map topographer, respectively. Despite a significant difference in mean keratometry (P<.001), the correlation among these three systems was strong. The maximum mean difference between two sets in simulated keratometry and astigmatism was <0.50 D. In the evaluation of anterior best-fit-sphere (BFS) and posterior BFS, the correlation between Galilei and Orbscan II was found to be 0.960 and 0.947, respectively. Maximum anterior central elevation measured by Orbscan II and Galilei was 9.2 ± 5.1 μm and 3.2 ± 1.8 μm, respectively. Maximum posterior central elevation by Orbscan II and Galilei was 33.8 ± 9.3 μm and 6.8 ± 3.8 μm, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite significant differences in mean keratometry readings and anterior and posterior elevation measurements among the three systems, the keratometry readings can be used interchangeably, as this difference is not clinically significant.

摘要

目的

评估 Galilei V4.01(Ziemer)、Orbscan IIz(Bausch & Lomb)和 Corneal Map 地形图仪(Costruzione Strumenti Oftalmici)系统在角膜曲率计读数和前、后表面高度图测量中的一致性。

方法

本前瞻性对照研究共纳入 92 例连续接受屈光手术的患者的 184 只眼,这些患者同时接受 Galilei(双 Scheimpflug)、Orbscan II(扫描狭缝)和 Corneal Map 地形图仪(Placido 盘式)系统检查。使用方差分析和配对 t 检验分别比较角膜曲率计读数和前、后表面高度图测量值。

结果

Galilei、Orbscan 和 Corneal Map 地形图仪的平均角膜曲率读数分别为 44.30±1.49 屈光度(D)、44.11±1.47 D 和 44.60±1.56 D。尽管平均角膜曲率存在显著差异(P<.001),但这三种系统之间的相关性很强。两套模拟角膜曲率和散光的最大平均差值均<0.50 D。在前最佳拟合球(BFS)和后 BFS 的评估中,Galilei 和 Orbscan II 之间的相关性分别为 0.960 和 0.947。Orbscan II 和 Galilei 测量的最大前中央隆起高度分别为 9.2±5.1 μm 和 3.2±1.8 μm。Orbscan II 和 Galilei 测量的最大后中央隆起高度分别为 33.8±9.3 μm 和 6.8±3.8 μm。

结论

尽管三种系统之间的平均角膜曲率读数和前、后表面高度测量值存在显著差异,但角膜曲率读数可以互换使用,因为这种差异在临床上并不重要。

相似文献

1
Comparison of corneal tomography measurements using Galilei, Orbscan II, and Placido disk-based topographer systems.使用 Galilei、Orbscan II 和基于 Placido 盘的角膜地形图仪系统进行角膜断层测量的比较。
J Refract Surg. 2011 Jul;27(7):502-8. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20101210-02. Epub 2010 Dec 15.
2
Comparison and repeatability of keratometric and corneal power measurements obtained by Orbscan II, Pentacam, and Galilei corneal tomography systems.眼前节分析系统 Orbscan II、Pentacam 和 Galilei 角膜地形图仪测量的角膜曲率和角膜屈光度的比较及可重复性。
Am J Ophthalmol. 2013 Jul;156(1):53-60. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2013.01.029. Epub 2013 Mar 28.
3
Comparison of keratometry measurements using the Pentacam HR, the Orbscan IIz, and the TMS-4 topographer.使用 Pentacam HR、Orbscan IIz 和 TMS-4 地形图仪进行角膜曲率测量的比较。
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2012 Nov;32(6):539-46. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2012.00942.x.
4
Comparison of accuracy of intraocular lens calculations using automated keratometry, a Placido-based corneal topographer, and a combined Placido-based and dual Scheimpflug corneal topographer.比较自动角膜曲率计、基于 Placido 的角膜地形图仪和基于 Placido 的联合双 Scheimpflug 角膜地形图仪的人工晶状体计算准确性。
Cornea. 2010 Oct;29(10):1136-8. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e3181d3d689.
5
Reliability of Orbscan II topography measurements in relation to refractive status.Orbscan II地形图测量结果与屈光状态的相关性及可靠性
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005 Aug;31(8):1607-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2005.01.013.
6
Comparison of dual rotating Scheimpflug-Placido, swept-source optical coherence tomography, and Placido-scanning-slit systems.双旋转Scheimpflug-普拉西多系统、扫频光学相干断层扫描系统和普拉西多扫描裂隙系统的比较。
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015 May;41(5):1018-29. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.08.040.
7
Corneal thickness, curvature, and elevation readings in normal corneas: combined Placido-Scheimpflug system versus combined Placido-scanning-slit system.正常角膜的角膜厚度、曲率和高度读数:组合式 Placido- Scheimpflug 系统与组合式 Placido-扫描狭缝系统。
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012 Jul;38(7):1198-206. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2012.01.033.
8
Comparison of horizontal corneal diameter measurements using Galilei, EyeSys and Orbscan II systems.使用伽利略、EyeSys和Orbscan II系统进行角膜水平直径测量的比较。
Clin Exp Optom. 2009 Sep;92(5):429-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1444-0938.2009.00407.x. Epub 2009 Jul 21.
9
Comparison of Pentacam and Orbscan IIz on posterior curvature topography measurements in keratoconus eyes.Pentacam与Orbscan IIz在圆锥角膜眼后表面曲率地形图测量中的比较。
Ophthalmology. 2006 Sep;113(9):1629-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.03.046.
10
Comparative evaluation of refractive surgery candidates with Placido topography, Orbscan II, Pentacam, and wavefront analysis.使用Placido角膜地形图仪、Orbscan II、Pentacam和波前分析对屈光手术候选者进行比较评估。
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008 Apr;34(4):623-31. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.11.054.

引用本文的文献

1
Corneal optical density: Structural basis, measurements, influencing factors, and roles in refractive surgery.角膜光学密度:结构基础、测量方法、影响因素及在屈光手术中的作用。
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023 Apr 6;11:1144455. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1144455. eCollection 2023.
2
Comparative Analysis of Corneal Parameters Performed with GalileiG6 and OCT Casia 2.使用Galilei G6和OCT Casia 2对角膜参数进行的比较分析。
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Jan 11;13(2):267. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13020267.
3
Comparison of Repeatability and Agreement between Swept-Source Optical Biometry and Dual-Scheimpflug Topography.
扫频光学生物测量与双Scheimpflug地形图之间的重复性和一致性比较。
J Ophthalmol. 2017;2017:1516395. doi: 10.1155/2017/1516395. Epub 2017 Dec 10.
4
Predictive Ability of Galilei to Distinguish Subclinical Keratoconus and Keratoconus from Normal Corneas.伽利略区分亚临床圆锥角膜和圆锥角膜与正常角膜的预测能力。
J Ophthalmic Vis Res. 2016 Jan-Mar;11(1):8-16. doi: 10.4103/2008-322X.180707.