Cargando…

Comparison of Optical versus Ultrasonic Biometry in Keratoconic Eyes

Purpose. To compare the measurements of optical versus ultrasonic biometry devices in keratoconic eyes. Materials and Methods. Forty-two eyes of 42 keratoconus (KC) patients enrolled in the study were examined. Clinical and demographic characteristics of the patients were noted, and detailed ophthal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Çınar, Yasin, Cingü, Abdullah Kürşat, Şahin, Muhammed, Şahin, Alparslan, Yüksel, Harun, Türkcü, Fatih Mehmet, Çınar, Tuba, Çaça, İhsan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3748737/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23986865
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/481238
_version_ 1782281120098811904
author Çınar, Yasin
Cingü, Abdullah Kürşat
Şahin, Muhammed
Şahin, Alparslan
Yüksel, Harun
Türkcü, Fatih Mehmet
Çınar, Tuba
Çaça, İhsan
author_facet Çınar, Yasin
Cingü, Abdullah Kürşat
Şahin, Muhammed
Şahin, Alparslan
Yüksel, Harun
Türkcü, Fatih Mehmet
Çınar, Tuba
Çaça, İhsan
author_sort Çınar, Yasin
collection PubMed
description Purpose. To compare the measurements of optical versus ultrasonic biometry devices in keratoconic eyes. Materials and Methods. Forty-two eyes of 42 keratoconus (KC) patients enrolled in the study were examined. Clinical and demographic characteristics of the patients were noted, and detailed ophthalmological examination was performed. Following Pentacam measurements, central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), and axial length (AL) were obtained using the Lenstar and US biometer to determine the reproducibility of the measurements between the two devices in keratoconic eyes. The Bland-Altman method was used to describe the agreement between the two devices. Results. The Lenstar could not measure at least one of the biometric properties in one eye and did not automatically give the corrected ACD in 2/3 of our study population. The Lenstar measured CCT (average difference 5.4 ± 19.6 µm; ICC = 0.90; P < 0.001), LT (average difference 0.13 ± 0.17 mm; ICC = 0.67; P < 0.001), and AL (average difference 0.10 ± 0.76 mm; ICC = 0.75; P < 0.001) thinner than US biometer, whereas it measured ACD (average difference 0.18 ± 0.17 mm; ICC = 0.85; P < 0.001) deeper than US biometer in keratoconic eyes. Conclusion. Although the difference between the measurements obtained using the two devices might be clinically acceptable, US biometry and Lenstar should not be used interchangeably for biometric measurements in KC patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3748737
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37487372013-08-28 Comparison of Optical versus Ultrasonic Biometry in Keratoconic Eyes Çınar, Yasin Cingü, Abdullah Kürşat Şahin, Muhammed Şahin, Alparslan Yüksel, Harun Türkcü, Fatih Mehmet Çınar, Tuba Çaça, İhsan J Ophthalmol Research Article Purpose. To compare the measurements of optical versus ultrasonic biometry devices in keratoconic eyes. Materials and Methods. Forty-two eyes of 42 keratoconus (KC) patients enrolled in the study were examined. Clinical and demographic characteristics of the patients were noted, and detailed ophthalmological examination was performed. Following Pentacam measurements, central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), and axial length (AL) were obtained using the Lenstar and US biometer to determine the reproducibility of the measurements between the two devices in keratoconic eyes. The Bland-Altman method was used to describe the agreement between the two devices. Results. The Lenstar could not measure at least one of the biometric properties in one eye and did not automatically give the corrected ACD in 2/3 of our study population. The Lenstar measured CCT (average difference 5.4 ± 19.6 µm; ICC = 0.90; P < 0.001), LT (average difference 0.13 ± 0.17 mm; ICC = 0.67; P < 0.001), and AL (average difference 0.10 ± 0.76 mm; ICC = 0.75; P < 0.001) thinner than US biometer, whereas it measured ACD (average difference 0.18 ± 0.17 mm; ICC = 0.85; P < 0.001) deeper than US biometer in keratoconic eyes. Conclusion. Although the difference between the measurements obtained using the two devices might be clinically acceptable, US biometry and Lenstar should not be used interchangeably for biometric measurements in KC patients. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2013 2013-08-05 /pmc/articles/PMC3748737/ /pubmed/23986865 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/481238 Text en Copyright © 2013 Yasin Çınar et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Çınar, Yasin
Cingü, Abdullah Kürşat
Şahin, Muhammed
Şahin, Alparslan
Yüksel, Harun
Türkcü, Fatih Mehmet
Çınar, Tuba
Çaça, İhsan
Comparison of Optical versus Ultrasonic Biometry in Keratoconic Eyes
title Comparison of Optical versus Ultrasonic Biometry in Keratoconic Eyes
title_full Comparison of Optical versus Ultrasonic Biometry in Keratoconic Eyes
title_fullStr Comparison of Optical versus Ultrasonic Biometry in Keratoconic Eyes
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Optical versus Ultrasonic Biometry in Keratoconic Eyes
title_short Comparison of Optical versus Ultrasonic Biometry in Keratoconic Eyes
title_sort comparison of optical versus ultrasonic biometry in keratoconic eyes
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3748737/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23986865
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/481238
work_keys_str_mv AT cınaryasin comparisonofopticalversusultrasonicbiometryinkeratoconiceyes
AT cinguabdullahkursat comparisonofopticalversusultrasonicbiometryinkeratoconiceyes
AT sahinmuhammed comparisonofopticalversusultrasonicbiometryinkeratoconiceyes
AT sahinalparslan comparisonofopticalversusultrasonicbiometryinkeratoconiceyes
AT yukselharun comparisonofopticalversusultrasonicbiometryinkeratoconiceyes
AT turkcufatihmehmet comparisonofopticalversusultrasonicbiometryinkeratoconiceyes
AT cınartuba comparisonofopticalversusultrasonicbiometryinkeratoconiceyes
AT cacaihsan comparisonofopticalversusultrasonicbiometryinkeratoconiceyes