Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Ophthalmology 7/2019

01-07-2019 | Original Paper

Agreement and repeatability of central corneal thickness measurements by four different optical devices and an ultrasound pachymeter

Authors: Nesrin Buyuktortop Gokcinar, Erhan Yumusak, Nurgul Ornek, Serap Yorubulut, Zafer Onaran

Published in: International Ophthalmology | Issue 7/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the repeatability and agreement of central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT), corneal topography (CT) with a combined Scheimpflug–Placido system, optical biometry (OB), specular microscopy (SM), and ultrasound pachymetry (UP).

Methods

A single observer measured CCT twice in 150 eyes of 150 subjects with each of five devices: Nidek RS-3000 Advance OCT, CSO Sirius combined Scheimpflug–Placido disc system CT, Nidek AL-Scan partial coherence interferometry-based OB, Tomey EM-3000 SM, and Reichert iPac ultrasonic pachymeter. Pachymetry values corrected by the SM device software were also recorded. Levels of agreement between devices were evaluated by Bland–Altman plots with 95% limits of agreement, and repeatability for each device was analysed with intraclass correlation coefficients.

Results

The mean CCTs measured by OCT, CT, OB, SM, corrected SM, and UP were 544.60 ± 29.56, 536.19 ± 32.14, 528.29 ± 29.45, 524.88 ± 32.38, 537.88 ± 32.38, and 545.29 ± 30.75 μm, respectively. Mean CCT differed significantly between the devices (p < 0.05) apart from between OCT and UP, and between CT and corrected SM. Mean paired differences between devices ranged between 0.68 and 20.41 μm. Repeatability with all devices was excellent (> 0.99). The range of limits of agreement was the least between OCT and UP.

Conclusions

Different CCT measurement techniques produce quite different results, so CCT evaluation and follow-up should be performed using the same device or devices with close compatibility.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Lackner B, Schmidinger G, Pieh S, Funovics MA, Skorpik C (2005) Repeatability and reproducibility of central corneal thickness measurement with Pentacam, Orbscan, and ultrasound. Optom Vis Sci 82(10):892–899CrossRefPubMed Lackner B, Schmidinger G, Pieh S, Funovics MA, Skorpik C (2005) Repeatability and reproducibility of central corneal thickness measurement with Pentacam, Orbscan, and ultrasound. Optom Vis Sci 82(10):892–899CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Barkana Y, Gerber Y, Elbaz U et al (2005) Central corneal thickness measurement with the Pentacam Scheimpflug system, optical low-coherence reflectometry pachymeter, and ultrasound pachymetry. J Cataract Refract Surg 31(9):1729–1735CrossRefPubMed Barkana Y, Gerber Y, Elbaz U et al (2005) Central corneal thickness measurement with the Pentacam Scheimpflug system, optical low-coherence reflectometry pachymeter, and ultrasound pachymetry. J Cataract Refract Surg 31(9):1729–1735CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Chakrabarti HS, Craig JP, Brahma A, Malik TY, McGhee CN (2001) Comparison of corneal thickness measurements using ultrasound and Orbscan slit-scanning topography in normal and post-LASIK eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg 27(11):1823–1828CrossRefPubMed Chakrabarti HS, Craig JP, Brahma A, Malik TY, McGhee CN (2001) Comparison of corneal thickness measurements using ultrasound and Orbscan slit-scanning topography in normal and post-LASIK eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg 27(11):1823–1828CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Doughty MJ, Jonuscheit S (2010) The orbscan acoustic (correction) factor for central corneal thickness measures of normal human corneas. Eye Contact Lens 36(2):106–115CrossRefPubMed Doughty MJ, Jonuscheit S (2010) The orbscan acoustic (correction) factor for central corneal thickness measures of normal human corneas. Eye Contact Lens 36(2):106–115CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Gonul S, Koktekir BE, Bakbak B, Gedik S (2014) Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements using optical low-coherence reflectometry, Fourier domain optical coherence tomography, and Scheimpflug camera. Arq Bras Oftalmol 77(6):345–350PubMed Gonul S, Koktekir BE, Bakbak B, Gedik S (2014) Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements using optical low-coherence reflectometry, Fourier domain optical coherence tomography, and Scheimpflug camera. Arq Bras Oftalmol 77(6):345–350PubMed
6.
go back to reference Khaja WA, Grover S, Kelmenson AT, Ferguson LR, Sambhav K, Chalam KV (2015) Comparison of central corneal thickness: ultrasound pachymetry versus slit-lamp optical coherence tomography, specular microscopy, and Orbscan. Clin Ophthalmol 9:1065–1070PubMedPubMedCentral Khaja WA, Grover S, Kelmenson AT, Ferguson LR, Sambhav K, Chalam KV (2015) Comparison of central corneal thickness: ultrasound pachymetry versus slit-lamp optical coherence tomography, specular microscopy, and Orbscan. Clin Ophthalmol 9:1065–1070PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Bechmann M, Thiel M, Roesen B et al (2000) Central corneal thickness determined with optical coherence tomography in various types of glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 84(11):1233–1237CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bechmann M, Thiel M, Roesen B et al (2000) Central corneal thickness determined with optical coherence tomography in various types of glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 84(11):1233–1237CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Wirbelauer C, Scholz C, Hoerauf H et al (2002) Noncontact corneal pachymetry with slit lamp-adapted optical coherence tomography. Am J Ophthalmol 133(4):444–450CrossRefPubMed Wirbelauer C, Scholz C, Hoerauf H et al (2002) Noncontact corneal pachymetry with slit lamp-adapted optical coherence tomography. Am J Ophthalmol 133(4):444–450CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Wong AC-M, Wong C-C, Yuen NS-Y et al (2002) Correlational study of central corneal thickness measurements on Hong Kong Chinese using optical coherence tomography, Orbscan and ultrasound pachymetry. Eye 16(6):715–721CrossRefPubMed Wong AC-M, Wong C-C, Yuen NS-Y et al (2002) Correlational study of central corneal thickness measurements on Hong Kong Chinese using optical coherence tomography, Orbscan and ultrasound pachymetry. Eye 16(6):715–721CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Amano S, Honda N, Amano Y et al (2006) Comparison of central corneal thickness by rotating Scheimpflug camera, ultrasonic pachymetry, and scanning-slit corneal topography. Ophthalmology 113(6):937–941CrossRefPubMed Amano S, Honda N, Amano Y et al (2006) Comparison of central corneal thickness by rotating Scheimpflug camera, ultrasonic pachymetry, and scanning-slit corneal topography. Ophthalmology 113(6):937–941CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Li H, Leung CK, Wong L et al (2008) Comparative study of central corneal thickness measurement with slit-lamp optical coherence tomography and visante optical coherence tomography. Ophthalmology 115(5):796–801CrossRefPubMed Li H, Leung CK, Wong L et al (2008) Comparative study of central corneal thickness measurement with slit-lamp optical coherence tomography and visante optical coherence tomography. Ophthalmology 115(5):796–801CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Rao HL, Kumar AU, Kumar A et al (2011) Evaluation of central corneal thickness measurement with RTVue spectral domain optical coherence tomography in normal subjects. Cornea 30(2):121–126CrossRefPubMed Rao HL, Kumar AU, Kumar A et al (2011) Evaluation of central corneal thickness measurement with RTVue spectral domain optical coherence tomography in normal subjects. Cornea 30(2):121–126CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Beutelspacher SC, Serbecic N, Scheuerle AF (2011) Assessment of central corneal thickness using OCT, ultrasound, optical low coherence reflectometry and Scheimpflug pachymetry. Eur J Ophthalmol 21(2):132–137CrossRefPubMed Beutelspacher SC, Serbecic N, Scheuerle AF (2011) Assessment of central corneal thickness using OCT, ultrasound, optical low coherence reflectometry and Scheimpflug pachymetry. Eur J Ophthalmol 21(2):132–137CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Kim HY, Budenz DL, Lee PS, Feuer WJ, Barton K (2008) Comparison of central corneal thickness using anterior segment optical coherence tomography vs ultrasound pachymetry. Am J Ophthalmol 145(2):228–232CrossRefPubMed Kim HY, Budenz DL, Lee PS, Feuer WJ, Barton K (2008) Comparison of central corneal thickness using anterior segment optical coherence tomography vs ultrasound pachymetry. Am J Ophthalmol 145(2):228–232CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Bayhan HA, Aslan Bayhan S, Can I (2014) Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with three new optical devices and a standard ultrasonic pachymeter. Int J Ophthalmol 7(2):302–308PubMedPubMedCentral Bayhan HA, Aslan Bayhan S, Can I (2014) Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with three new optical devices and a standard ultrasonic pachymeter. Int J Ophthalmol 7(2):302–308PubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Randleman JB, Lynn MJ, Perez-Straziota CE, Weissman HM, Kim SW (2015) Comparison of central and peripheral corneal thickness measurements with scanning-slit, Scheimpflug and Fourier-domain ocular coherence tomography. Br J Ophthalmol 99(9):1176–1181CrossRefPubMed Randleman JB, Lynn MJ, Perez-Straziota CE, Weissman HM, Kim SW (2015) Comparison of central and peripheral corneal thickness measurements with scanning-slit, Scheimpflug and Fourier-domain ocular coherence tomography. Br J Ophthalmol 99(9):1176–1181CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Sedaghat MR, Daneshvar R, Kargozar A, Derakhshan A, Daraei M (2010) Comparison of central corneal thickness measurement using ultrasonic pachymetry, rotating Scheimpflug camera, and scanning-slit topography. Am J Ophthalmol 150(6):780–789CrossRefPubMed Sedaghat MR, Daneshvar R, Kargozar A, Derakhshan A, Daraei M (2010) Comparison of central corneal thickness measurement using ultrasonic pachymetry, rotating Scheimpflug camera, and scanning-slit topography. Am J Ophthalmol 150(6):780–789CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Módis L Jr, Szalai E, Németh G, Berta A (2011) Reliability of the corneal thickness measurements with the Pentacam HR imaging system and ultrasound pachymetry. Cornea 30(5):561–566CrossRefPubMed Módis L Jr, Szalai E, Németh G, Berta A (2011) Reliability of the corneal thickness measurements with the Pentacam HR imaging system and ultrasound pachymetry. Cornea 30(5):561–566CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Bao F, Wang Q, Cheng S et al (2014) Comparison and evaluation of central corneal thickness using 2 new noncontact specular microscopes and conventional pachymetry devices. Cornea 33(6):576–581CrossRefPubMed Bao F, Wang Q, Cheng S et al (2014) Comparison and evaluation of central corneal thickness using 2 new noncontact specular microscopes and conventional pachymetry devices. Cornea 33(6):576–581CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Scotto R, Bagnis A, Papadia M, Cutolo CA, Risso D, Traverso CE (2017) Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements using ultrasonic pachymetry, anterior segment OCT and noncontact specular microscopy. J Glaucoma 26(10):860–865CrossRefPubMed Scotto R, Bagnis A, Papadia M, Cutolo CA, Risso D, Traverso CE (2017) Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements using ultrasonic pachymetry, anterior segment OCT and noncontact specular microscopy. J Glaucoma 26(10):860–865CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Pierro L, Iuliano L, Gagliardi M, Ambrosi A, Rama P, Bandello F (2016) Central corneal thickness reproducibility among ten different instruments. Optom Vis Sci 93(11):1371–1379CrossRefPubMed Pierro L, Iuliano L, Gagliardi M, Ambrosi A, Rama P, Bandello F (2016) Central corneal thickness reproducibility among ten different instruments. Optom Vis Sci 93(11):1371–1379CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference McAlinden C, Khadka J, Pesudovs K (2015) Precision (repeatability and reproducibility) studies and sample-size calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg 41(12):2598–2604CrossRefPubMed McAlinden C, Khadka J, Pesudovs K (2015) Precision (repeatability and reproducibility) studies and sample-size calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg 41(12):2598–2604CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Agreement and repeatability of central corneal thickness measurements by four different optical devices and an ultrasound pachymeter
Authors
Nesrin Buyuktortop Gokcinar
Erhan Yumusak
Nurgul Ornek
Serap Yorubulut
Zafer Onaran
Publication date
01-07-2019
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
International Ophthalmology / Issue 7/2019
Print ISSN: 0165-5701
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2630
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-018-0983-2

Other articles of this Issue 7/2019

International Ophthalmology 7/2019 Go to the issue