Ruiz Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, McGovern Medical School at The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (UTHealth), 6400 Fannin St., Suite #1800, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Department of Ophthalmology, Dell Medical School, Austin, TX, USA.
BMC Ophthalmol. 2023 Jan 5;23(1):10. doi: 10.1186/s12886-023-02768-w.
To compare the intra-device repeatability and inter-device reproducibility between two anterior segment imaging instruments, the CASIA SS-1000 (Tomey Corp., Nagoya, Japan) and Pentacam (OCULUS, Arlington, WA) in measuring anterior segment parameters.
Single-center, prospective clinical trial. Participants ≥20 years of age were included. One eye was randomly selected, each imaged by three CASIA SS-1000 devices and three Pentacam devices by three different examiners. Each photographer operated a pair of devices, one CASIA SS-1000 and one Pentacam. The image order for each participant was determined by a random permutation table. Three images were taken from each device. A total of 18 images were taken for each eye. Ratios of the standard deviations, referenced as (CASIA/Pentacam), were calculated to compare the repeatability and reproducibility of the two imaging instruments.
In all, 66 participants with a mean age of 46.4 years (±21.7) were enrolled in the study. All repeatability ratios and intra-device variability were less than 1 (anterior corneal curvature: flat = 0.86, steep = 0.85; posterior corneal curvature: flat = 0.43, steep = 0.61; and map: thinnest = 0.22; central = 0.24, 2 mm = 0.26, 4 mm = 0.27, and 6 mm = 0.30). All reproducibility ratios, which measure the inter-device variability, were less than 1 (anterior corneal curvature: flat = 0.58, steep = 0.73; posterior corneal curvature: flat = 0.25, steep = 0.31; and pachymetry map: thinnest = 0.20; central = 0.20; 2 mm = 0.20; 4 mm = 0.19; and 6 mm = 0.22). A ratio of less than 1 indicates that the CASIA SS-1000 has more consistent measurements.
The CASIA SS-1000 was found to have better repeatability and reproducibility compared to the Pentacam for both corneal curvature and pachymetry maps. This greater consistency may require further study to determine whether the decreased variability can be translated into improved clinical results.
比较两种眼前节成像仪(Tomey 公司的 CASIA SS-1000 与 Oculus 的 Pentacam)在测量眼前节参数时的设备内重复性和设备间再现性。
单中心、前瞻性临床试验。纳入年龄≥20 岁的参与者。随机选择一只眼,由三位检查者分别使用三种 CASIA SS-1000 设备和三种 Pentacam 设备进行检查。每位摄影师操作一对设备,一个 CASIA SS-1000 和一个 Pentacam。每位参与者的图像顺序由随机排列表确定。从每种设备拍摄三张图像。每只眼共拍摄 18 张图像。计算标准偏差的比值(CASIA/Pentacam),以比较两种成像仪的重复性和再现性。
共纳入 66 名平均年龄为 46.4±21.7 岁的参与者。所有重复性比值和设备内变异性均小于 1(角膜前曲率:平坦=0.86,陡峭=0.85;角膜后曲率:平坦=0.43,陡峭=0.61;map:最薄=0.22;中央=0.24、2mm=0.26、4mm=0.27、6mm=0.30)。所有再现性比值(衡量设备间变异性)均小于 1(角膜前曲率:平坦=0.58,陡峭=0.73;角膜后曲率:平坦=0.25,陡峭=0.31;角膜厚度图:最薄=0.20;中央=0.20;2mm=0.20;4mm=0.19;6mm=0.22)。比值小于 1 表示 CASIA SS-1000 的测量更一致。
与 Pentacam 相比,CASIA SS-1000 在角膜曲率和角膜厚度图方面具有更好的重复性和再现性。这种更高的一致性可能需要进一步研究,以确定变异性的降低是否可以转化为更好的临床结果。