首页> 外文期刊>Journal of cataract and refractive surgery >Corneal thickness measurements: scanning-slit corneal topography and noncontact specular microscopy versus ultrasonic pachymetry.
【24h】

Corneal thickness measurements: scanning-slit corneal topography and noncontact specular microscopy versus ultrasonic pachymetry.

机译:角膜厚度测量:扫描狭缝角膜地形图和非接触式镜检显微镜与超声测厚法。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

PURPOSE: To compare central corneal thickness measurements taken with 3 pachymetry systems: Orbscan scanning-slit corneal topography/pachymetry, Topcon SP2000P noncontact specular microscopy, and Tomey ultrasonic pachymetry. SETTING: Multicenter study, Tokyo, Japan. METHODS: In 216 healthy eyes of 114 subjects, scanning-slit topography, noncontact specular microscopy, and ultrasonic pachymetry were used in that sequence to record central corneal thickness. In another 20 healthy eyes of 13 subjects, 2 sets of measurements were repeated for each pachymetry to assess repeatability. RESULTS: The mean central corneal thickness was compatible between scanning-slit topography (546.9 micrometers +/- 35.4 [SD] ) and ultrasonic pachymetry (548.1 +/- 33.0 micrometers); however, noncontact specular microscopy gave a significantly smaller mean (525.3 +/- 31.4 micrometers) than the other 2 tests (P<.001, Tukey multiple comparison). There were significant linear correlations between scanning-slit topography and noncontact specular microscopy (r = 0.846, P<.001), noncontact specular microscopy and ultrasonic pachymetry (r = 0.897, P<.001), and ultrasonic pachymetry and scanning-slit topography (r = 0.852, P<.001). Noncontact specular microscopy tended to show the best repeatability; however, the difference was not statistically significant (P =.663, repeated-measure analysis of variance). CONCLUSIONS: Corneal thickness readings were comparable between scanning-slit topography and pachymetry; noncontact specular microscopy gave significantly smaller values. The measurements of the 3 methods showed significant linear correlations with one another. All methods provided acceptable repeatability of measurements.
机译:目的:为了比较使用三种测厚仪进行的中央角膜厚度测量:Orbscan扫描狭缝角膜地形图/测厚仪,Topcon SP2000P非接触式镜面显微镜和Tomey超声测厚仪。地点:多中心研究,日本东京。方法:在114名受试者的216只健康眼中,依次采用扫描狭缝形貌,非接触式镜检和超声测厚法记录中央角膜厚度。在13名受试者的另外20只健康的眼睛中,对于每个测厚法重复两组测量以评估可重复性。结果:平均中央角膜厚度在扫描狭缝形貌(546.9微米+/- 35.4 [SD])和超声测厚法(548.1 +/- 33.0微米)之间是兼容的;但是,非接触式镜面显微镜的平均值(525.3 +/- 31.4微米)明显小于其他两个测试(P <.001,Tukey多重比较)。扫描狭缝形貌与非接触式镜检显微镜之间存在显着的线性相关性(r = 0.846,P <.001),非接触性镜面显微镜和超声测厚仪(r = 0.897,P <.001),以及超声测厚法和扫描狭缝形貌(r = 0.852,P <.001)。非接触式镜面显微镜往往显示出最佳的可重复性。但是,差异没有统计学意义(P = .663,方差的重复测量分析)。结论:角膜厚度读数在扫描狭缝形貌和测厚法之间是可比的。非接触式镜面显微镜得到的值明显较小。三种方法的测量结果显示出显着的线性相关性。所有方法均提供可接受的测量重复性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号