Anterior Ocular Biometrics Using Placido-scanning-slit System, Rotating Scheimpflug Tomography, and Swept-source Optical Coherence Tomography
- Author:
Soyoung RYU
1
;
Sook Hyun YOON
;
Ikhyun JUN
;
Kyoung Yul SEO
;
Eung Kweon KIM
;
Tae-im KIM
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- From:Korean Journal of Ophthalmology 2022;36(3):264-273
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Purpose:To compare anterior biometry measurements using placido-scanning-slit topography, rotating Scheimpflug tomography, and swept-source optical coherence tomography.
Methods:A retrospective review consisted of 80 eyes of 49 participants who underwent anterior chamber depth (ACD), central corneal thickness (CCT), and keratometry examination on the same day. We used placido-scanning-slit topography (ORBscan II), rotating Scheimpflug tomography (Pentacam HR), and swept-source optical coherence tomography (CASIA SS1000). The intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate the agreement and differences between measurements.
Results:The mean ACD values were 2.88 ± 0.43, 2.82 ± 0.50, and 2.68 ± 0.44 mm; and the mean CCT values were 536.96 ± 31.19, 543.79 ± 31.04, and 561.41 ± 32.60 μm; and the mean keratometry (Km) were 43.81 ± 1.69, 43.81 ± 1.77, and 44.65 ± 1.95 diopters; as measured by CASIA SS-1000, Pentacam HR, and ORBscan II, respectively. Among the three devices, ACD was deepest to shallowest in the order of CASIA SS-1000, Pentacam HR, and ORBscan II (p < 0.05). The CCT was thickest to thinnest in the order of ORBscan II, Pentacam HR, and CASIA SS-1000 (p < 0.05). No significant differences in Km values were examined between CASIA SS-1000 and Pentacam HR, whereas ORBscan II overestimated Km with a statistically significant difference compared to the other two devices.
Conclusions:High level of agreement was found between CASIA SS-1000 and Pentacam HR for anterior parameters, including ACD, CCT, and Km, suggesting interchangeability. However, ORBscan II measurements differed considerably with the measurements obtained from the other two devices; therefore, it should not be used interchangeably. However, further studies with repeatability test should be considered in order to elucidate the reliability of each device.
