Interchangeability in Automated Corneal Diameter Measurements Across Different Biometric Devices: A Systematic Review of Agreement Studies.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Maria Muzyka-Woźniak, Slawomir Woźniak, Grzegorz Łabuz
{"title":"Interchangeability in Automated Corneal Diameter Measurements Across Different Biometric Devices: A Systematic Review of Agreement Studies.","authors":"Maria Muzyka-Woźniak, Slawomir Woźniak, Grzegorz Łabuz","doi":"10.3928/1081597X-20240212-02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To provide an up-to-date review of the agreement in automated white-to-white (WTW) measurement between the latest topographic and biometric devices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this systematic review, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched for articles published between 2017 and 2023, focusing on WTW agreement studies on adult, virgin eyes, with or without cataract and no other ocular comorbidities. Studies evaluating WTW measurements performed with autokeratometers, manual calipers, or manual image analysis were excluded. When available, the following metrics for the agreement of WTW measurements between pairs of devices were included: mean difference ± standard deviation, 95% limits of agreement (LoA), LoA width, 95% confidence interval (95 CI%), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-one studies, covering comparisons for 19 devices, were included. Altogether, 81 paired comparisons were performed for 4,595 eyes of 4,002 individuals. The mean difference in WTW measurements between devices ranged from 0.01 mm up to 0.96 mm, with varying CI. The 95% LoA width ranged from 0.31 to 2.45 mm (median: 0.65 mm). The majority of pairwise comparisons reported LoA wider than 0.5 mm, a clinically significant value for phakic intraocular lens sizing.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Nearly all analyzed studies demonstrated the lack of interchangeability of the WTW parameter. The corneal diameter, assessed by means of grayscale en-face image analysis, tended to demonstrate the lowest agreement among devices compared to other measured biometric parameters. <b>[<i>J Refract Surg</i>. 2024;40(3):e182-e194.]</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":16951,"journal":{"name":"Journal of refractive surgery","volume":"40 3","pages":"e182-e194"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20240212-02","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To provide an up-to-date review of the agreement in automated white-to-white (WTW) measurement between the latest topographic and biometric devices.

Methods: In this systematic review, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched for articles published between 2017 and 2023, focusing on WTW agreement studies on adult, virgin eyes, with or without cataract and no other ocular comorbidities. Studies evaluating WTW measurements performed with autokeratometers, manual calipers, or manual image analysis were excluded. When available, the following metrics for the agreement of WTW measurements between pairs of devices were included: mean difference ± standard deviation, 95% limits of agreement (LoA), LoA width, 95% confidence interval (95 CI%), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

Results: Forty-one studies, covering comparisons for 19 devices, were included. Altogether, 81 paired comparisons were performed for 4,595 eyes of 4,002 individuals. The mean difference in WTW measurements between devices ranged from 0.01 mm up to 0.96 mm, with varying CI. The 95% LoA width ranged from 0.31 to 2.45 mm (median: 0.65 mm). The majority of pairwise comparisons reported LoA wider than 0.5 mm, a clinically significant value for phakic intraocular lens sizing.

Conclusions: Nearly all analyzed studies demonstrated the lack of interchangeability of the WTW parameter. The corneal diameter, assessed by means of grayscale en-face image analysis, tended to demonstrate the lowest agreement among devices compared to other measured biometric parameters. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(3):e182-e194.].

不同生物测量设备自动角膜直径测量的互换性:一致性研究的系统性回顾。
目的:对最新地形图和生物识别设备之间自动白对白(WTW)测量的一致性进行最新综述:在这篇系统性综述中,我们在 PubMed、Web of Science 和 Scopus 数据库中搜索了 2017 年至 2023 年间发表的文章,重点关注对有或无白内障、无其他眼部合并症的成年处女眼进行的 WTW 一致性研究。排除了评估使用自动角膜曲率计、手动卡尺或手动图像分析进行的WTW测量的研究。如果有可用数据,则纳入以下指标来衡量成对设备之间 WTW 测量的一致性:平均差 ± 标准偏差、95% 一致性限值 (LoA)、LoA 宽度、95% 置信区间 (95 CI%) 和类内相关系数 (ICC):结果:共纳入 41 项研究,对 19 种设备进行了比较。共对 4,002 人的 4,595 只眼睛进行了 81 次配对比较。不同设备之间 WTW 测量值的平均差异从 0.01 毫米到 0.96 毫米不等,CI 值各异。95% LoA 宽度范围为 0.31 至 2.45 毫米(中位数:0.65 毫米)。大多数配对比较报告的 LoA 宽度超过了 0.5 毫米,这对于角膜内人工晶体的选型具有重要的临床意义:结论:几乎所有分析研究都表明 WTW 参数缺乏互换性。与其他测量的生物测量参数相比,通过灰度面内图像分析评估的角膜直径在不同设备之间的一致性最低。[J Refract Surg. 2024;40(3):e182-e194]。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
160
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Refractive Surgery, the official journal of the International Society of Refractive Surgery, a partner of the American Academy of Ophthalmology, has been a monthly peer-reviewed forum for original research, review, and evaluation of refractive and lens-based surgical procedures for more than 30 years. Practical, clinically valuable articles provide readers with the most up-to-date information regarding advances in the field of refractive surgery. Begin to explore the Journal and all of its great benefits such as: • Columns including “Translational Science,” “Surgical Techniques,” and “Biomechanics” • Supplemental videos and materials available for many articles • Access to current articles, as well as several years of archived content • Articles posted online just 2 months after acceptance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信