Publication:
Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements in corneal edema using ultrasound pachymetry, visante anterior-segment optical coherence tomography, cirrus optical coherence tomography, and pentacam scheimpflug camera tomography

dc.contributor.authorNida Wongchaisuwaten_US
dc.contributor.authorAnkana Metheetrairaten_US
dc.contributor.authorPratuangsri Chonpimaien_US
dc.contributor.authorWaree Nujoien_US
dc.contributor.authorPinnita Prabhasawaten_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherFaculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-28T06:30:01Z
dc.date.available2019-08-28T06:30:01Z
dc.date.issued2018-01-01en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2018 Wongchaisuwat et al. Purpose: To compare the central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements in subjects with corneal edema using ultrasound pachymetry, Visante anterior-segment optical coherence tomography (OCT), Cirrus OCT, and Pentacam Scheimpflug camera tomography. Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study included 46 eyes of 33 patients with corneal edema and a CCT exceeding 550 μm evaluated by ultrasound pachymetry, Visante OCT, Cirrus OCT, and Pentacam. Two observers measured each eye twice. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility were determined and agreement among the devices calculated. Results: CCT was measured in 40 eyes of 29 patients. Regardless of the CCT, the measurements obtained using Visante OCT, Cirrus CCT, and ultrasound pachymetry were well correlated. Interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility were high among the three devices. Pentacam overestimated the results compared with the other devices, and ultrasound pachymetry was unmeasurable in six (13%) eyes with very thick and opaque corneas. In eyes with mild corneal edema (CCT 551–650 μm), measurements from the four devices were comparable. Conclusion: All devices reliably measured the CCT,650 μm. In eyes with edema exceeding 650 μm, CCT measurements from the Visante OCT, Cirrus OCT, and ultrasound pachymetry devices showed good reproducibility and were well correlated, while the Pentacam overestimated the values compared to the other devices. Pentacam and ultrasound pachymetry should not be used in eyes with extreme corneal edema and opacity.en_US
dc.identifier.citationClinical Ophthalmology. Vol.12, (2018), 1865-1873en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.2147/OPTH.S172159en_US
dc.identifier.issn11775483en_US
dc.identifier.issn11775467en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85057721341en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/47053
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85057721341&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleComparison of central corneal thickness measurements in corneal edema using ultrasound pachymetry, visante anterior-segment optical coherence tomography, cirrus optical coherence tomography, and pentacam scheimpflug camera tomographyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85057721341&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections