Comparison of three methods of measuring corneal thickness and anterior chamber depth
- PMID: 16386970
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2005.08.048
Comparison of three methods of measuring corneal thickness and anterior chamber depth
Abstract
Purpose: To compare three different methods of measuring corneal thickness (CT) and anterior chamber depth (ACD).
Design: Prospective clinical trial (Medical University of Vienna, Austria).
Methods: Central CT (CCT), CT at four peripheral points, and central ACD were measured in 88 eyes of 44 healthy subjects with the Pentacam (rotating Scheimpflug camera; Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany), Orbscan I (scanning-slit topography system; Orbtek Inc, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA), and AC-Master (partial coherence interferometry; Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany), and the results were compared.
Results: The upper (lower) limits of agreement for CCT measurements were 7.9 (-22.2) microm between AC-Master and Pentacam, 17.6 (-32.5) microm between AC-Master and Orbscan, and 25.2 (-25.9) microm between Pentacam and Orbscan. Correlation was high between all three methods (r = 0.94 to 0.97). The upper and lower limits of agreement for ACD were 0.174 (-0.251) mm between AC-Master and Pentacam, 0.406 (-0.004) mm between AC-Master and Orbscan, and 0.384 (0.095) mm between Pentacam and Orbscan. Correlation was high between the three methods (r = 0.96 between Orbscan and Pentacam; others 0.92). Correlation was lower for the CT measurements at the four peripheral points.
Conclusions: The CCT and ACD values obtained by Pentacam, Orbscan, and AC-Master measurements correlated well and showed few outliers. The two new systems (Pentacam, AC-Master) provide a reliable, easy-to-use, noncontact method of measuring CCT and ACD. Larger differences occurred only when measuring peripheral CT values, especially between AC-Master and the other two methods.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
