These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Corneal thickness measurements: scanning-slit corneal topography and noncontact specular microscopy versus ultrasonic pachymetry. Author: Suzuki S, Oshika T, Oki K, Sakabe I, Iwase A, Amano S, Araie M. Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg; 2003 Jul; 29(7):1313-8. PubMed ID: 12900238. Abstract: 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.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]