青光眼和疑似青光眼超声测厚仪、Orbscan II和SP3000P测量角膜中央厚度的比较

Tsung-Ho Ou, Ing-Chou Lai, Mei-Ching Teng
{"title":"青光眼和疑似青光眼超声测厚仪、Orbscan II和SP3000P测量角膜中央厚度的比较","authors":"Tsung-Ho Ou,&nbsp;Ing-Chou Lai,&nbsp;Mei-Ching Teng","doi":"10.4103/2319-4170.106146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements are affected by the central cornea thickness (CCT). The conventional method for CCT measurement is ultrasonic pachymetry. However, noncontact procedures lower the risk of infection and corneal damage. In this study, we compared the CCT measured by Orbscan II, SP3000P, and ultrasonic pachymetry in patients with glaucoma or glaucoma suspect.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The CCT of 208 eyes (46 eyes with glaucoma suspect, 42 with primary angle-closure glaucoma, and 120 with primary open-angle glaucoma) was measured using Orbscan II, SP3000P, and ultrasonic pachymetry. We compared the linear correlation of the CCT between each mode.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean CCT measured by Orbscan II (563.63 ± 35.867 µm) was larger than with the other two devices. There were significant linear correlations between measurements with ultrasonic pachymetry and Orbscan II (Pearson correlation coefficient (r) = 0.793, p < 0.001), ultrasonic pachymetry and SP3000P (r = 0.890, p < 0.001), and Orbscan II and SP3000P (r = 0.803, p < 0.001). We divided the participants into 3 groups on the basis of the CCT measured with ultrasonic pachymetry: ≤ 500 µm, > 500 µm to ≤ 578 µm, and > 578 µm. There was no significant linear correlation between ultrasonic pachymetry and Orbscan II in the thin group. But, in the intermediate and thick CCT groups, there were significant linear correlations between each of the three devices.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We showed good linear correlations of CCT measurements between each of 3 devices, especially in the intermediate and thickest CCTs. These results will be helpful in predicting the relationship between IOP and CCT for the diagnosis and screening of glaucoma; even we used optic systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":10018,"journal":{"name":"Chang Gung medical journal","volume":"35 3","pages":"255-62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements by ultrasonic pachymetry, Orbscan II, and SP3000P in eyes with glaucoma or glaucoma suspect.\",\"authors\":\"Tsung-Ho Ou,&nbsp;Ing-Chou Lai,&nbsp;Mei-Ching Teng\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/2319-4170.106146\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements are affected by the central cornea thickness (CCT). The conventional method for CCT measurement is ultrasonic pachymetry. However, noncontact procedures lower the risk of infection and corneal damage. In this study, we compared the CCT measured by Orbscan II, SP3000P, and ultrasonic pachymetry in patients with glaucoma or glaucoma suspect.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The CCT of 208 eyes (46 eyes with glaucoma suspect, 42 with primary angle-closure glaucoma, and 120 with primary open-angle glaucoma) was measured using Orbscan II, SP3000P, and ultrasonic pachymetry. We compared the linear correlation of the CCT between each mode.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean CCT measured by Orbscan II (563.63 ± 35.867 µm) was larger than with the other two devices. There were significant linear correlations between measurements with ultrasonic pachymetry and Orbscan II (Pearson correlation coefficient (r) = 0.793, p < 0.001), ultrasonic pachymetry and SP3000P (r = 0.890, p < 0.001), and Orbscan II and SP3000P (r = 0.803, p < 0.001). We divided the participants into 3 groups on the basis of the CCT measured with ultrasonic pachymetry: ≤ 500 µm, > 500 µm to ≤ 578 µm, and > 578 µm. There was no significant linear correlation between ultrasonic pachymetry and Orbscan II in the thin group. But, in the intermediate and thick CCT groups, there were significant linear correlations between each of the three devices.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We showed good linear correlations of CCT measurements between each of 3 devices, especially in the intermediate and thickest CCTs. These results will be helpful in predicting the relationship between IOP and CCT for the diagnosis and screening of glaucoma; even we used optic systems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10018,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chang Gung medical journal\",\"volume\":\"35 3\",\"pages\":\"255-62\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chang Gung medical journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/2319-4170.106146\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chang Gung medical journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/2319-4170.106146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

摘要

背景:眼压(IOP)测量受角膜中央厚度(CCT)的影响。常规的CCT测量方法是超声测厚法。然而,非接触式手术降低了感染和角膜损伤的风险。在本研究中,我们比较了Orbscan II、SP3000P和超声测厚术在青光眼或疑似青光眼患者中的CCT。方法:采用Orbscan II、SP3000P及超声测厚仪对208只眼(疑似青光眼46只,原发性闭角型青光眼42只,原发性开角型青光眼120只)进行CCT检测。我们比较了各模态间CCT的线性相关性。结果:Orbscan II测量的CCT平均值(563.63±35.867µm)大于其他两种仪器。超声测厚仪与Orbscan II (Pearson相关系数r = 0.793, p < 0.001)、超声测厚仪与SP3000P (r = 0.890, p < 0.001)、Orbscan II与SP3000P (r = 0.803, p < 0.001)存在显著的线性相关。我们根据超声测厚法测量的CCT将参与者分为≤500µm、> 500µm至≤578µm和> 578µm三组。薄组超声测厚与Orbscan II无显著的线性相关。但是,在中间和厚CCT组中,三种设备之间存在显著的线性相关性。结论:我们发现三种设备的CCT测量值之间具有良好的线性相关性,特别是在中间和最厚的CCT中。这些结果将有助于预测眼压与CCT的关系,为青光眼的诊断和筛查提供依据;甚至我们也用了光学系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements by ultrasonic pachymetry, Orbscan II, and SP3000P in eyes with glaucoma or glaucoma suspect.

Background: Intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements are affected by the central cornea thickness (CCT). The conventional method for CCT measurement is ultrasonic pachymetry. However, noncontact procedures lower the risk of infection and corneal damage. In this study, we compared the CCT measured by Orbscan II, SP3000P, and ultrasonic pachymetry in patients with glaucoma or glaucoma suspect.

Methods: The CCT of 208 eyes (46 eyes with glaucoma suspect, 42 with primary angle-closure glaucoma, and 120 with primary open-angle glaucoma) was measured using Orbscan II, SP3000P, and ultrasonic pachymetry. We compared the linear correlation of the CCT between each mode.

Results: The mean CCT measured by Orbscan II (563.63 ± 35.867 µm) was larger than with the other two devices. There were significant linear correlations between measurements with ultrasonic pachymetry and Orbscan II (Pearson correlation coefficient (r) = 0.793, p < 0.001), ultrasonic pachymetry and SP3000P (r = 0.890, p < 0.001), and Orbscan II and SP3000P (r = 0.803, p < 0.001). We divided the participants into 3 groups on the basis of the CCT measured with ultrasonic pachymetry: ≤ 500 µm, > 500 µm to ≤ 578 µm, and > 578 µm. There was no significant linear correlation between ultrasonic pachymetry and Orbscan II in the thin group. But, in the intermediate and thick CCT groups, there were significant linear correlations between each of the three devices.

Conclusion: We showed good linear correlations of CCT measurements between each of 3 devices, especially in the intermediate and thickest CCTs. These results will be helpful in predicting the relationship between IOP and CCT for the diagnosis and screening of glaucoma; even we used optic systems.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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