Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Nov 21;23(1):194.
doi: 10.1186/s12880-023-01147-7.

Repeatability and agreement of AOCT-1000 M, RTVue XR and IOL master 500 in measuring corneal thickness mapping and axial length applying principle of optical coherence tomography

Hailong Ni #  1 , Suzhong Xu #  2 , Li Tian  2 , Jieli Mao  2 , Jing Li  2 , Na Lin  2 , Peike Hu  1 , Zhiyi Wu  1 , Xiang Chen  1 , Zhishu Bao  2 , Jingwei Zheng  2 , Peihua Yan  3 , Ruzhi Deng  4
Affiliations

Repeatability and agreement of AOCT-1000 M, RTVue XR and IOL master 500 in measuring corneal thickness mapping and axial length applying principle of optical coherence tomography

Hailong Ni et al. BMC Med Imaging. .

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the repeatability and agreement of Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography (AOCT-1000 M and RTVue XR) and partial coherence interferometry biometer (IOL Master 500) in measuring corneal thickness mapping and axial length respectively.

Methods: Corneal thickness was measured by AOCT-1000 M and RTVue XR. Axial lengths were measured by AOCT-1000 M and IOL Master 500. The repeatability and agreement of corneal thickness and axial length were calculated in two groups of devices. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to verify the repeatability of the device. The 95% confidence interval of the difference compared to the set cut-off value was used to verify the agreement between the two devices.

Results: A total of 60 subjects with 58 eyes were included. The central corneal thickness measured by AOCT-1000 M and RTVue XR were 504.46 ± 42.53 μm and 504.43 ± 42.89 μm respectively. The average difference between groups was 0.03 ± 4.58 μm, and the 95% confidence interval was (-1.17, 1.24), which was far less than the set threshold value of 15 μm (P < 0.001). Both RTVue XR and AOCT-1000 M had very good ICC values of central corneal thickness (0.998 and 0.994, respectively). The average axial lengths measured by AOCT-1000 M and IOL Master 500 were 24.28 ± 1.25 mm and 24.29 ± 1.26 mm respectively and the 95% confidence interval was (-0.02, 0.01), which was less than the set threshold value of 0.15 mm (P < 0.001). The ICC for both devices were 1.000.

Conclusion: Good repeatability and agreement were seen in measurements of central corneal thickness and axial length by AOCT-1000 M.

Keywords: AOCT-1000 M; Agreement; Axial length; Central corneal thickness; RTVue XR; Repeatability.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The central (2 mm diameter area) and peripheral (2–5 mm and 5–6 mm diameter area) corneal thickness were measured by two devices. Superior, supranasal, nasal, infranasal, inferior, infratemporal, temporal and supratemporal were abbreviated by S, SN, N, IN, I, IT, T and ST, respectively
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Bland-Altman plot of central corneal thickness measurements between AOCT-1000 M and RTVue XR(n = 58)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Bland–Altman plots of corneal thickness in 2-5 mm diameter areas between AOCT-1000 M and RTVue XR. S, SN, N, IN, I, IT, T and ST represented 8 directions
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Bland–Altman plots of corneal thickness in 5–6 mm diameter areas between AOCT-1000 M and RTVue XR. S, SN, N, IN, I, IT, T and ST represented 8 directions
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Bland-Altman plot of axial length measurements between AOCT-1000 M and IOL Master 500(n = 58)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Holden B, Fricke T, Wilson D, Jong M, Naidoo K, Sankaridurg P, Wong T, Naduvilath T, Resnikoff S. Global prevalence of myopia and high myopia and temporal trends from 2000 through 2050. Ophthalmology. 2016;123(5):1036–42. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.01.006. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tkatchenko AV, Tkatchenko TV, Guggenheim JA, Verhoeven VJ, Hysi PG, Wojciechowski R, Singh PK, Kumar A, Thinakaran G, Consortium for Refractive E. APLP2 regulates refractive error and Myopia Development in mice and humans. PLoS Genet. 2015;11(8). e1005432. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baird PN, Saw SM, Lanca C, Guggenheim JA, Smith EL, Zhou X, Matsui KO, Wu PC, Sankaridurg P, Chia A, et al. Myopia. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2020;6(1):99. doi: 10.1038/s41572-020-00231-4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kim TI, Alió D, Barrio JL, Wilkins M, Cochener B, Ang M. Refractive Surgery. Lancet. 2019;393(10185):2085–98. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33209-4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ortega-Usobiaga J, Rocha-de-Lossada C, Llovet-Rausell A, Llovet-Osuna F. Update on contraindications in laser corneal refractive Surgery. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol (Engl Ed) 2023;98(2):105–11. doi: 10.1016/j.oftal.2022.07.001. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources