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: Comparison of central corneal thickness using optical low-coherence reflectometry and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography.
    Author: López-Miguel A, Correa-Pérez ME, Miranda-Anta S, Iglesias-Cortiñas D, Coco-Martín MB, Maldonado MJ.
    Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg; 2012 May; 38(5):758-64. PubMed ID: 22436868.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To assess intraobserver and interobserver reliability of central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements using optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR) technology and its agreement with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). SETTING: Rio Hortega University Hospital, Valladolid, Spain. DESIGN: Evaluation of diagnostic technology. METHODS: To analyze OLCR intraobserver repeatability, 1 examiner obtained 4 successive measurements. To study interobserver reproducibility, a different examiner obtained another CCT measurement. To determine agreement with SD-OCT, the first examiner also obtained CCTs. Intraobserver and interobserver within-subject standard deviation (S(w)), coefficient of variation (CV(w)), and limits of agreement (LoA) were obtained for OLCR reliability analysis; for study agreement, data were analyzed using the paired-sample t test and the LoA were calculated. RESULTS: For OLCR intraobserver repeatability, the S(w) and precision (1.96×S(w)) were 2.33 and 4.56 μm, respectively. The intraobserver CV(w) was 0.42%. For interobserver reproducibility, the S(w) and precision were 11.59 and 22.71 μm, respectively; the CV(w) was 2.10%. The mean difference between observers was -1.35 μm (95% confidence interval [CI], -3.97 to 1.26). The width of the LoA was 45.27 μm. The mean CCT difference between OLCR and SD-OCT was 5.68±11.46 μm (95% CI, 8.29-3.08 μm; P=.0001), and the width of the LoA was 44.93 μm. CONCLUSIONS: Optical low-coherence reflectometry technology provided reliable intraobserver and interobserver CCT measurements. Although OLCR underestimated the pachymetry by less than 6 μm compared with SD-OCT, its interchangeability fell within the range of interobserver reproducibility. Both noncontact pachymetry measurements seem to be clinically useful and may be used interchangeably with minimum calibration adjustment. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]