Comparison of Central Corneal Thickness Measurements with Four Different New Devices and Ultrasound Pachymetry
Citation
Şimşek C, Kaya C, Karalezli A. Comparison of Central Corneal Thickness Measurements with Four Different New Devices and Ultrasound Pachymetry. Turk J Ophthalmol. 2022 Oct 28;52(5):318-323. doi: 10.4274/tjo.galenos.2021.22465. PMID: 36317802; PMCID: PMC9631500.Abstract
Objectives: To assess the central corneal thickness (CCT) with 5 different devices, evaluate the repeatability of the devices, and determine the possible relationship between thickness values and sex.
Materials and methods: The study included 308 eyes of 154 patients (76 women, 78 men) between the ages of 18-30 who presented to the Ophthalmology Clinic of Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Training and Research Hospital. Autorefractor (Topcon, Japan), ultrasound pachymetry (UP) (Ceniscan, USA), high-resolution Pentacam (Oculus, USA), anterior segment-optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) (Optovue, USA), and Spectralis AS-OCT (Heidelberg, Germany) measurements were assessed.
Results: The mean age of the study participants was 23.2±0.2 years and the mean CCT was 540±14.1 μm, with no statistically significant difference in CCT between sexes (p>0.05). Mean CCT values were 557.0±26.7 μm with the autorefractor, 543.6±32.9 μm with UP, 533.8±30.2 μm with the Oculus Pentacam, 519.8±30.1 μm with Optovue AS-OCT, and 547.5±31.6 μm with Heidelberg AS-OCT. Pairwise comparisons between devices showed that the Optovue AS-OCT gave significantly lower CCT measurements than the autorefractor and Heidelberg AS-OCT device (p=0.027 and p=0.033, respectively). The coefficient of repeatability for autorefractor, UP, high-resolution Pentacam, Optovue AS-OCT, and Heidelberg AS-OCT CCT measurements were 1.51%, 2.46%, 3.72%, 2.57%, and 3.34%, respectively.
Conclusion: Measurements made with five different devices showed that CCT was comparable and clinically usable. However, it was determined that the Optovue AS-OCT showed lower CCT values compare to other devices. When compared in terms of repeatability, it was found to be lower in the Pentacam than other devices.