Suppr超能文献

三种不同角膜诊断成像设备在评估眼表方面的可靠性、可重复性及一致性。

Reliability, repeatability, and accordance between three different corneal diagnostic imaging devices for evaluating the ocular surface.

作者信息

Garcia-Terraza Abril L, Jimenez-Collado David, Sanchez-Sanoja Francisco, Arteaga-Rivera José Y, Morales Flores Norma, Pérez-Solórzano Sofía, Garfias Yonathan, Graue-Hernández Enrique O, Navas Alejandro

机构信息

Department of Cornea and Refractive Surgery, Conde de Valenciana Institute of Ophthalmology, Mexico City, Mexico.

Faculty of Medicine, Autonomous University of Baja California, Mexicali, Baja California, Mexico.

出版信息

Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Jul 29;9:893688. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.893688. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate repeatability, reproducibility, and accordance between ocular surface measurements within three different imaging devices.

METHODS

We performed an observational study on 66 healthy eyes. Tear meniscus height, non-invasive tear break-up time (NITBUT) and meibography were measured using three corneal imaging devices: Keratograph 5M (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany), Antares (Lumenis, Sidney, Australia), and LacryDiag (Quantel Medical, Cournon d'Auvergne, France). One-way ANOVAs with analyses were used to calculate accordance between the tear meniscus and NITBUT. Reproducibility was assessed through coefficients of variation and repeatability with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Reliability of meibography classification was analyzed by calculating Fleiss' Kappa Index and presented in Venn diagrams.

RESULTS

Coefficients of variation were high and differed greatly depending on the device and measurement. ICCs showed moderate reliability of NITBUT and tear meniscus height measurements. We observed discordance between measurements of tear meniscus height between the three devices, F2, 195 = 15.24, < 0.01. Measurements performed with Antares were higher; 0.365 ± 0.0851, than those with Keratograph 5M and LacryDiag; 0.293 ± 0.0790 and 0.306 ± 0.0731. NITBUT also showed discordance between devices, F2, 111 = 13.152, < 0.01. Measurements performed with LacryDiag were lower (10.4 ± 1.82) compared to those of Keratograph 5M (12.6 ± 4.01) and Antares (12.6 ± 4.21). Fleiss' Kappa showed a value of -0.00487 for upper lid and 0.128 for inferior lid Meibography classification, suggesting discrete to poor agreement between measurements.

CONCLUSION

Depending on the device used and parameter analyzed, measurements varied between each other, showing a difference in image processing.

摘要

目的

评估三种不同成像设备眼表测量结果之间的可重复性、再现性及一致性。

方法

我们对66只健康眼睛进行了一项观察性研究。使用三种角膜成像设备测量泪河高度、无创泪膜破裂时间(NITBUT)和睑板腺照相:德国韦茨拉尔Oculus公司的Keratograph 5M、澳大利亚悉尼Lumenis公司的Antares以及法国奥弗涅地区库尔农Quantel Medical公司的LacryDiag。采用单因素方差分析及事后检验来计算泪河与NITBUT之间的一致性。通过变异系数评估再现性,并使用组内相关系数(ICC)评估可重复性。通过计算Fleiss卡帕指数分析睑板腺照相分类的可靠性,并以维恩图展示。

结果

变异系数较高,且因设备和测量项目而异。ICC显示NITBUT和泪河高度测量的可靠性中等。我们观察到三种设备测量的泪河高度存在不一致性,F(2, 195) = 15.24,P < 0.01。Antares测量的结果更高,为0.365 ± 0.0851,高于Keratograph 5M和LacryDiag测量的结果,分别为0.293 ± 0.0790和0.306 ± 0.0731。NITBUT在设备之间也显示出不一致性,F(2, 111) = 13.152,P < 0.01。与Keratograph 5M(12.6 ± 4.01)和Antares(12.6 ± 4.21)相比,LacryDiag测量的结果较低(10.4 ± 1.82)。Fleiss卡帕指数显示上睑睑板腺照相分类的值为 -0.00487,下睑为0.128,表明测量之间的一致性为离散至较差。

结论

根据所使用的设备和分析的参数,测量结果彼此不同,显示出图像处理方面的差异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/75b1/9372285/ecab729d1005/fmed-09-893688-g001.jpg

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