Ebpay生命医药出版社


Ebpay生命

100763

论文已发表

提 交 论 文


注册即可获取Ebpay生命的最新动态

注 册



IF 收录期刊



  • 3.3 Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press)
  • 3.4 Clin Epidemiol
  • 2.5 Cancer Manag Res
  • 2.9 Infect Drug Resist
  • 3.5 Clin Interv Aging
  • 4.7 Drug Des Dev Ther
  • 2.7 Int J Chronic Obstr
  • 6.6 Int J Nanomed
  • 2.5 Int J Women's Health
  • 2.5 Neuropsych Dis Treat
  • 2.7 OncoTargets Ther
  • 2.0 Patient Prefer Adher
  • 2.3 Ther Clin Risk Manag
  • 2.5 J Pain Res
  • 2.8 Diabet Metab Synd Ob
  • 2.8 Psychol Res Behav Ma
  • 3.0 Nat Sci Sleep
  • 1.8 Pharmgenomics Pers Med
  • 2.7 Risk Manag Healthc Policy
  • 4.2 J Inflamm Res
  • 2.1 Int J Gen Med
  • 4.2 J Hepatocell Carcinoma
  • 3.7 J Asthma Allergy
  • 1.9 Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol
  • 2.7 J Multidiscip Healthc



更多详情 >>





视频

Scheimpflug vs Scanning-Slit Corneal Tomography: Comparison of Corneal and Anterior Chamber Tomography Indices for Repeatability and Agreement in Healthy Eyes

 

Authors Kanellopoulos AJ

Received 1 March 2020

Accepted for publication 14 August 2020

Published 4 September 2020 Volume 2020:14 Pages 2583—2592

DOI http://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S251998

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Scott Fraser

Purpose: To evaluate and compare the repeatability and agreement of Scheimpflug vs scanning-slit tomography of the cornea and the anterior chamber in terms of keratometric and tomographic indices in healthy eyes.
Methods: The 20 eyes of 10 healthy participants underwent 3 consecutive measurements using both Scheimpflug-tomography and scanning-slit tomography, diagnostic devices. Multiple corneal and anterior chamber tomographic parameters were recorded and evaluated to include corneal keratometry and its axis; corneal best-fit sphere (BFS), pachymetry mapping, angle kappa, anterior chamber depth (ACD), pupil diameter, and . Repeatability for each device was assessed using the within each subject standard deviation of sequential exams, the coefficient variation (CV) and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreement between the two devices was assessed using Bland–Altman plots with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) and correlation coefficient (r).
Results: Both devices were found to have high repeatability (ICC> 0.9) both in keratometric and other tomographic measurements. Scheimpflug tomography’s repeatability though appeared superior in the average keratometry values, anterior and posterior BFS, thinnest corneal pachymetry value and (p< 0.05). Agreement: Statistically significant inter-device differences were noted in the mean values of K1, K2, BFS, ACD and thinnest corneal pachymetry (p< 0.05). Despite the agreement differences noted, the two devices were well correlated (r> 0.8) in respective measurements with Scheimpflug delivering consistently lower values than the scanning-slit tomography device.
Conclusion: Scheimpflug-tomography repeatability was found to be superior to that of scanning-slit tomography in this specific study, in most parameters evaluated. Inter-device agreement evaluation suggests that reading from the two devices may not be used interchangeably in absolute values, yet they are well correlated with Scheimpflug delivering consistently lower values in most.
Keywords: Pentacam, Orbscan, Scheimpflug corneal tomography, scanning-slit corneal tomography




Download Article[PDF]