Gülay Yalçınkaya Çakır, Ahmet Kırgız, Inanç Tuncel, Nilay Kandemir Beşek, Seda Liman Uzun, Sibel Ahmet, Mehmet Özgür Çubuk
{"title":"Lenstar LS900、Pentacam和Sirius设备在角膜塑形和健康眼前段参数测量方面的一致。","authors":"Gülay Yalçınkaya Çakır, Ahmet Kırgız, Inanç Tuncel, Nilay Kandemir Beşek, Seda Liman Uzun, Sibel Ahmet, Mehmet Özgür Çubuk","doi":"10.3928/1081597X-20250515-07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the agreement of the Lenstar LS900 (Haag-Streit AG), Sirius (CSO), and Pentacam HR (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH) devices in terms of anterior chamber depth (ACD), flat (K1) and steep (K2) axis keratometry, white-to-white corneal diameter (WTW), and pupil diameter (PD) measurements in healthy eyes and keratoconus cases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Measurements were obtained using the Lenstar LS900, Sirius, and Pentacam HR by an experienced technician who was blinded to the results from each modality. The agreement between the devices was evaluated with a Bland-Altman analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred thirty-eight eyes of 138 patients (73 healthy, 65 keratoconus) were examined. There was no proportional error in the K1 and K2 measurements of the devices in healthy eyes (<i>P</i> > .05). In keratoconus cases, there was a proportional error between the K1 and K2 measurements of the devices (for K1, the Lenstar vs the Sirius: <i>P</i> < .001, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.634, the Lenstar vs the Pentacam: <i>P</i> < .001, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.322, the Sirius vs the Pentacam: <i>P</i> < .001, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.333; for K2, the Lenstar vs the Sirius: <i>P</i> < .001, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.666, the Lenstar vs the Pentacam: <i>P</i> < .001, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.514, the Sirius vs the Pentacam: <i>P</i> < .001, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.523)). There was no proportional error between the ACD and WTW measurements of the devices in healthy cases and keratoconus cases (<i>P</i> > .05). Compatibility in PD measurements was noted only between the Lenstar and Pentacam in both groups (<i>P</i> > .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The three devices demonstrated agreement for ACD and WTW. The Lenstar LS900 and Pentacam HR were compatible in PD. Keratometry values were in agreement between the three devices in healthy eyes. This agreement did not hold in keratoconus. Using these devices interchangeably to evaluate keratometry in keratoconus may yield misleading results. <b>[<i>J Refract Surg</i>. 2025;41(7):e690-e701.]</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":16951,"journal":{"name":"Journal of refractive surgery","volume":"41 7","pages":"e690-e701"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Agreement Between Lenstar LS900, Pentacam, and Sirius Devices in Terms of Anterior Segment Parameter Measurements in Keratoconic and Healthy Eyes.\",\"authors\":\"Gülay Yalçınkaya Çakır, Ahmet Kırgız, Inanç Tuncel, Nilay Kandemir Beşek, Seda Liman Uzun, Sibel Ahmet, Mehmet Özgür Çubuk\",\"doi\":\"10.3928/1081597X-20250515-07\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the agreement of the Lenstar LS900 (Haag-Streit AG), Sirius (CSO), and Pentacam HR (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH) devices in terms of anterior chamber depth (ACD), flat (K1) and steep (K2) axis keratometry, white-to-white corneal diameter (WTW), and pupil diameter (PD) measurements in healthy eyes and keratoconus cases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Measurements were obtained using the Lenstar LS900, Sirius, and Pentacam HR by an experienced technician who was blinded to the results from each modality. The agreement between the devices was evaluated with a Bland-Altman analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred thirty-eight eyes of 138 patients (73 healthy, 65 keratoconus) were examined. There was no proportional error in the K1 and K2 measurements of the devices in healthy eyes (<i>P</i> > .05). In keratoconus cases, there was a proportional error between the K1 and K2 measurements of the devices (for K1, the Lenstar vs the Sirius: <i>P</i> < .001, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.634, the Lenstar vs the Pentacam: <i>P</i> < .001, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.322, the Sirius vs the Pentacam: <i>P</i> < .001, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.333; for K2, the Lenstar vs the Sirius: <i>P</i> < .001, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.666, the Lenstar vs the Pentacam: <i>P</i> < .001, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.514, the Sirius vs the Pentacam: <i>P</i> < .001, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.523)). There was no proportional error between the ACD and WTW measurements of the devices in healthy cases and keratoconus cases (<i>P</i> > .05). Compatibility in PD measurements was noted only between the Lenstar and Pentacam in both groups (<i>P</i> > .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The three devices demonstrated agreement for ACD and WTW. The Lenstar LS900 and Pentacam HR were compatible in PD. Keratometry values were in agreement between the three devices in healthy eyes. This agreement did not hold in keratoconus. Using these devices interchangeably to evaluate keratometry in keratoconus may yield misleading results. <b>[<i>J Refract Surg</i>. 2025;41(7):e690-e701.]</b>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of refractive surgery\",\"volume\":\"41 7\",\"pages\":\"e690-e701\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"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-20250515-07\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20250515-07","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
摘要
目的：评估Lenstar LS900 （Haag-Streit AG）、Sirius （CSO）和Pentacam HR （Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH）设备在健康眼睛和圆锥角膜病例的前房深度（ACD）、平轴（K1）和陡轴（K2）角膜测量、白到白角膜直径（WTW）和瞳孔直径（PD）测量方面的一致性。方法：由一名经验丰富的技术人员使用Lenstar LS900、Sirius和Pentacam HR进行测量，该技术人员对每种模式的结果不知情。使用Bland-Altman分析评估设备之间的一致性。结果：对138例患者138只眼（健康73只，圆锥角膜65只）进行检查。该装置在健康眼睛中的K1和K2测量值无比例误差（P < 0.05）。在圆锥角膜病例中，设备的K1和K2测量值之间存在比例误差(对于K1， Lenstar vs Sirius: P < 0.001, R2 = 0.634, Lenstar vs Pentacam: P < 0.001, R2 = 0.322, Sirius vs Pentacam: P < 0.001, R2 = 0.333；对于K2， Lenstar vs Sirius: P < 0.001, R2 = 0.666, Lenstar vs Pentacam: P < 0.001, R2 = 0.514, Sirius vs Pentacam: P < 0.001, R2 = 0.523))。健康患者与圆锥角膜患者的ACD和WTW测量值无比例误差（P < 0.05）。两组PD测量仅在Lenstar和Pentacam之间存在相容性（P < 0.05）。结论：三种装置在ACD和WTW方面表现一致。Lenstar LS900和Pentacam HR在PD中是兼容的。在健康眼睛中，三种装置的角膜测量值是一致的。这一共识并不适用于圆锥角膜。交替使用这些设备来评估圆锥角膜的角膜测量可能会产生误导的结果。[J].中国光学精密工程，2015;41(7):559 - 561。
Agreement Between Lenstar LS900, Pentacam, and Sirius Devices in Terms of Anterior Segment Parameter Measurements in Keratoconic and Healthy Eyes.
Purpose: To assess the agreement of the Lenstar LS900 (Haag-Streit AG), Sirius (CSO), and Pentacam HR (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH) devices in terms of anterior chamber depth (ACD), flat (K1) and steep (K2) axis keratometry, white-to-white corneal diameter (WTW), and pupil diameter (PD) measurements in healthy eyes and keratoconus cases.
Methods: Measurements were obtained using the Lenstar LS900, Sirius, and Pentacam HR by an experienced technician who was blinded to the results from each modality. The agreement between the devices was evaluated with a Bland-Altman analysis.
Results: One hundred thirty-eight eyes of 138 patients (73 healthy, 65 keratoconus) were examined. There was no proportional error in the K1 and K2 measurements of the devices in healthy eyes (P > .05). In keratoconus cases, there was a proportional error between the K1 and K2 measurements of the devices (for K1, the Lenstar vs the Sirius: P < .001, R2 = 0.634, the Lenstar vs the Pentacam: P < .001, R2 = 0.322, the Sirius vs the Pentacam: P < .001, R2 = 0.333; for K2, the Lenstar vs the Sirius: P < .001, R2 = 0.666, the Lenstar vs the Pentacam: P < .001, R2 = 0.514, the Sirius vs the Pentacam: P < .001, R2 = 0.523)). There was no proportional error between the ACD and WTW measurements of the devices in healthy cases and keratoconus cases (P > .05). Compatibility in PD measurements was noted only between the Lenstar and Pentacam in both groups (P > .05).
Conclusions: The three devices demonstrated agreement for ACD and WTW. The Lenstar LS900 and Pentacam HR were compatible in PD. Keratometry values were in agreement between the three devices in healthy eyes. This agreement did not hold in keratoconus. Using these devices interchangeably to evaluate keratometry in keratoconus may yield misleading results. [J Refract Surg. 2025;41(7):e690-e701.].
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.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
