Cargando…

A Comparative Study of Clinical vs. Digital Exophthalmometry Measurement Methods

BACKGROUND: A number of orbital diseases may be evaluated based on the degree of exophthalmos, but there is still no gold standard method for the measurement of this parameter. In this study we compare two exophthalmometry measurement methods (digital photography and clinical) with regard to reprodu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pereira, Tháıs de Sous, Kuniyoshi, Cristina Hiromi, Leite, Cristiane de Almeida, Gebrim, Eloisa M. M. S., Monteiro, Mário L. R., Pieroni Gonçalves, Allan C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7125494/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32280513
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/1397410
_version_ 1783515957438709760
author Pereira, Tháıs de Sous
Kuniyoshi, Cristina Hiromi
Leite, Cristiane de Almeida
Gebrim, Eloisa M. M. S.
Monteiro, Mário L. R.
Pieroni Gonçalves, Allan C.
author_facet Pereira, Tháıs de Sous
Kuniyoshi, Cristina Hiromi
Leite, Cristiane de Almeida
Gebrim, Eloisa M. M. S.
Monteiro, Mário L. R.
Pieroni Gonçalves, Allan C.
author_sort Pereira, Tháıs de Sous
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A number of orbital diseases may be evaluated based on the degree of exophthalmos, but there is still no gold standard method for the measurement of this parameter. In this study we compare two exophthalmometry measurement methods (digital photography and clinical) with regard to reproducibility and the level of correlation and agreement with measurements obtained with Computerized Tomography (CT) measurements. METHODS: Seventeen patients with bilateral proptosis and 15 patients with normal orbits diseases were enrolled. Patients underwent orbital CT, Hertel exophthalmometry (HE) and standardized frontal and side facial photographs by a single trained photographer. Exophthalmometry measurements with HE, the digital photographs and axial CT scans were obtained twice by the same examiner and once by another examiner. Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) was used to assess correlations between methods. Validity between methods was assessed by mean differences, interintraclass correlation coefficients (ICC's), and Bland–Altman plots. RESULTS: Mean values were significantly higher in the proptosis group (34 orbits) than in the normal group (30 orbits), regardless of the method. Within each group, mean digital exophthalmometry measurements (24.32 ± 5.17 mm and 18.62 ± 3.87 mm) were significantly greater than HE measurements (20.87 ± 2.53 mm and 17.52 ± 2.67 mm) with broader range of standard deviation. Inter-/intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.95/0.93 for clinical, 0.92/0.74 for digital, and 0.91/0.95 for CT measurements. Correlation coefficients between HE and CT scan measurements in both groups of subjects (r = 0.84 and r = 0.91, p < 0.05) were greater than those between digital and CT scan measurements (r = 0.61 and r = 0.75, p < 0.05). On the Bland–Altman plots, HE showed better agreement to CT measurements compared to the digital photograph method in both groups studied. CONCLUSIONS: Although photographic digital exophthalmometry showed strong correlation and agreement with CT scan measurements, it still performs worse than and is not as accurate as clinical Hertel exophthalmometry. This trail is registered with NCT01999790.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7125494
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71254942020-04-10 A Comparative Study of Clinical vs. Digital Exophthalmometry Measurement Methods Pereira, Tháıs de Sous Kuniyoshi, Cristina Hiromi Leite, Cristiane de Almeida Gebrim, Eloisa M. M. S. Monteiro, Mário L. R. Pieroni Gonçalves, Allan C. J Ophthalmol Research Article BACKGROUND: A number of orbital diseases may be evaluated based on the degree of exophthalmos, but there is still no gold standard method for the measurement of this parameter. In this study we compare two exophthalmometry measurement methods (digital photography and clinical) with regard to reproducibility and the level of correlation and agreement with measurements obtained with Computerized Tomography (CT) measurements. METHODS: Seventeen patients with bilateral proptosis and 15 patients with normal orbits diseases were enrolled. Patients underwent orbital CT, Hertel exophthalmometry (HE) and standardized frontal and side facial photographs by a single trained photographer. Exophthalmometry measurements with HE, the digital photographs and axial CT scans were obtained twice by the same examiner and once by another examiner. Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) was used to assess correlations between methods. Validity between methods was assessed by mean differences, interintraclass correlation coefficients (ICC's), and Bland–Altman plots. RESULTS: Mean values were significantly higher in the proptosis group (34 orbits) than in the normal group (30 orbits), regardless of the method. Within each group, mean digital exophthalmometry measurements (24.32 ± 5.17 mm and 18.62 ± 3.87 mm) were significantly greater than HE measurements (20.87 ± 2.53 mm and 17.52 ± 2.67 mm) with broader range of standard deviation. Inter-/intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.95/0.93 for clinical, 0.92/0.74 for digital, and 0.91/0.95 for CT measurements. Correlation coefficients between HE and CT scan measurements in both groups of subjects (r = 0.84 and r = 0.91, p < 0.05) were greater than those between digital and CT scan measurements (r = 0.61 and r = 0.75, p < 0.05). On the Bland–Altman plots, HE showed better agreement to CT measurements compared to the digital photograph method in both groups studied. CONCLUSIONS: Although photographic digital exophthalmometry showed strong correlation and agreement with CT scan measurements, it still performs worse than and is not as accurate as clinical Hertel exophthalmometry. This trail is registered with NCT01999790. Hindawi 2020-03-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7125494/ /pubmed/32280513 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/1397410 Text en Copyright © 2020 Tháıs de Sous Pereira et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 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
Pereira, Tháıs de Sous
Kuniyoshi, Cristina Hiromi
Leite, Cristiane de Almeida
Gebrim, Eloisa M. M. S.
Monteiro, Mário L. R.
Pieroni Gonçalves, Allan C.
A Comparative Study of Clinical vs. Digital Exophthalmometry Measurement Methods
title A Comparative Study of Clinical vs. Digital Exophthalmometry Measurement Methods
title_full A Comparative Study of Clinical vs. Digital Exophthalmometry Measurement Methods
title_fullStr A Comparative Study of Clinical vs. Digital Exophthalmometry Measurement Methods
title_full_unstemmed A Comparative Study of Clinical vs. Digital Exophthalmometry Measurement Methods
title_short A Comparative Study of Clinical vs. Digital Exophthalmometry Measurement Methods
title_sort comparative study of clinical vs. digital exophthalmometry measurement methods
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7125494/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32280513
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/1397410
work_keys_str_mv AT pereirathaısdesous acomparativestudyofclinicalvsdigitalexophthalmometrymeasurementmethods
AT kuniyoshicristinahiromi acomparativestudyofclinicalvsdigitalexophthalmometrymeasurementmethods
AT leitecristianedealmeida acomparativestudyofclinicalvsdigitalexophthalmometrymeasurementmethods
AT gebrimeloisamms acomparativestudyofclinicalvsdigitalexophthalmometrymeasurementmethods
AT monteiromariolr acomparativestudyofclinicalvsdigitalexophthalmometrymeasurementmethods
AT pieronigoncalvesallanc acomparativestudyofclinicalvsdigitalexophthalmometrymeasurementmethods
AT pereirathaısdesous comparativestudyofclinicalvsdigitalexophthalmometrymeasurementmethods
AT kuniyoshicristinahiromi comparativestudyofclinicalvsdigitalexophthalmometrymeasurementmethods
AT leitecristianedealmeida comparativestudyofclinicalvsdigitalexophthalmometrymeasurementmethods
AT gebrimeloisamms comparativestudyofclinicalvsdigitalexophthalmometrymeasurementmethods
AT monteiromariolr comparativestudyofclinicalvsdigitalexophthalmometrymeasurementmethods
AT pieronigoncalvesallanc comparativestudyofclinicalvsdigitalexophthalmometrymeasurementmethods