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: Anterior ocular biometry using 3-dimensional optical coherence tomography.
    Author: Fukuda S, Kawana K, Yasuno Y, Oshika T.
    Journal: Ophthalmology; 2009 May; 116(5):882-9. PubMed ID: 19410946.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To evaluate anterior ocular biometry by comparing the measurements of central corneal thickness (CCT) and anterior chamber depth (ACD) with 3-dimensional corneal and anterior segment optical coherence tomography (CAS-OCT) and other methods. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Forty eyes of 40 normal subjects. METHODS: The CCT was measured by 4 methods (CAS-OCT, Scheimpflug camera, scanning-slit topography, and ultrasonic pachymetry), and the ACD was measured by 3 methods (CAS-OCT, Scheimpflug camera, and scanning-slit topography). The anterior chamber volume (ACV) was calculated with CAS-OCT. Repeatability and reproducibility of CAS-OCT measurements were evaluated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The CCT and ACD were measured and compared between devices. The ACV was calculated with CAS-OCT. Coefficient of variation and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated to evaluate repeatability and reproducibility of CAS-OCT measurements. RESULTS: The mean CCT was 547.0+/-39.0, 590.0+/-39.8, 525.0+/-45.0, and 545.0+/-40.3 microm with CAS-OCT, Scheimpflug camera, scanning-slit topography, and ultrasonic pachymetry, respectively. Significant differences were observed among the 4 methods (P<0.0001; 1-way analysis of variance [ANOVA]). The CCT measured with Scheimpflug camera was significantly larger than those measured with the other methods (P<0.0001; Bonferroni multiple comparison), but there was no significant difference among the other 3 methods. The mean ACD was 3.01+/-0.47, 3.04+/-0.52, and 2.88+/-0.50 mm with CAS-OCT, Scheimpflug camera, and scanning-slit topography, respectively. There was no significant difference among the 3 methods (P = 0.678; 1-way ANOVA). A significant linear correlation in CCT and ACD were observed between CAS-OCT and other methods (all P<0.0001). The mean ACV calculated with CAS-OCT was 169.7+/-23.1 mm(3). The coefficient of repeatability and reproducibility of CCT and ACD measurements were <5% and ICCs were >0.98. CONCLUSIONS: The CCT measurements were comparable among CAS-OCT, ultrasonic pachymetry, and scanning-slit topography, but Scheimpflug camera yielded a significantly higher CCT value. There was no significant difference in ACD measurements among CAS-OCT, Scheimpflug camera, and scanning-slit topography. The ACV was noninvasively measured by CAS-OCT. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]