Cargando…
Reliability, repeatability, and accordance between three different corneal diagnostic imaging devices for evaluating the ocular surface
PURPOSE: To evaluate repeatability, reproducibility, and accordance between ocular surface measurements within three different imaging devices. METHODS: We performed an observational study on 66 healthy eyes. Tear meniscus height, non-invasive tear break-up time (NITBUT) and meibography were measure...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9372285/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35966863 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.893688 |
_version_ | 1784767347150553088 |
---|---|
author | Garcia-Terraza, Abril L. Jimenez-Collado, David Sanchez-Sanoja, Francisco Arteaga-Rivera, José Y. Morales Flores, Norma Pérez-Solórzano, Sofía Garfias, Yonathan Graue-Hernández, Enrique O. Navas, Alejandro |
author_facet | Garcia-Terraza, Abril L. Jimenez-Collado, David Sanchez-Sanoja, Francisco Arteaga-Rivera, José Y. Morales Flores, Norma Pérez-Solórzano, Sofía Garfias, Yonathan Graue-Hernández, Enrique O. Navas, Alejandro |
author_sort | Garcia-Terraza, Abril L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To evaluate repeatability, reproducibility, and accordance between ocular surface measurements within three different imaging devices. METHODS: We performed an observational study on 66 healthy eyes. Tear meniscus height, non-invasive tear break-up time (NITBUT) and meibography were measured using three corneal imaging devices: Keratograph 5M (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany), Antares (Lumenis, Sidney, Australia), and LacryDiag (Quantel Medical, Cournon d’Auvergne, France). One-way ANOVAs with post hoc analyses were used to calculate accordance between the tear meniscus and NITBUT. Reproducibility was assessed through coefficients of variation and repeatability with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Reliability of meibography classification was analyzed by calculating Fleiss’ Kappa Index and presented in Venn diagrams. RESULTS: Coefficients of variation were high and differed greatly depending on the device and measurement. ICCs showed moderate reliability of NITBUT and tear meniscus height measurements. We observed discordance between measurements of tear meniscus height between the three devices, F2, 195 = 15.24, p < 0.01. Measurements performed with Antares were higher; 0.365 ± 0.0851, than those with Keratograph 5M and LacryDiag; 0.293 ± 0.0790 and 0.306 ± 0.0731. NITBUT also showed discordance between devices, F2, 111 = 13.152, p < 0.01. Measurements performed with LacryDiag were lower (10.4 ± 1.82) compared to those of Keratograph 5M (12.6 ± 4.01) and Antares (12.6 ± 4.21). Fleiss’ Kappa showed a value of -0.00487 for upper lid and 0.128 for inferior lid Meibography classification, suggesting discrete to poor agreement between measurements. CONCLUSION: Depending on the device used and parameter analyzed, measurements varied between each other, showing a difference in image processing. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9372285 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93722852022-08-13 Reliability, repeatability, and accordance between three different corneal diagnostic imaging devices for evaluating the ocular surface Garcia-Terraza, Abril L. Jimenez-Collado, David Sanchez-Sanoja, Francisco Arteaga-Rivera, José Y. Morales Flores, Norma Pérez-Solórzano, Sofía Garfias, Yonathan Graue-Hernández, Enrique O. Navas, Alejandro Front Med (Lausanne) Medicine PURPOSE: To evaluate repeatability, reproducibility, and accordance between ocular surface measurements within three different imaging devices. METHODS: We performed an observational study on 66 healthy eyes. Tear meniscus height, non-invasive tear break-up time (NITBUT) and meibography were measured using three corneal imaging devices: Keratograph 5M (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany), Antares (Lumenis, Sidney, Australia), and LacryDiag (Quantel Medical, Cournon d’Auvergne, France). One-way ANOVAs with post hoc analyses were used to calculate accordance between the tear meniscus and NITBUT. Reproducibility was assessed through coefficients of variation and repeatability with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Reliability of meibography classification was analyzed by calculating Fleiss’ Kappa Index and presented in Venn diagrams. RESULTS: Coefficients of variation were high and differed greatly depending on the device and measurement. ICCs showed moderate reliability of NITBUT and tear meniscus height measurements. We observed discordance between measurements of tear meniscus height between the three devices, F2, 195 = 15.24, p < 0.01. Measurements performed with Antares were higher; 0.365 ± 0.0851, than those with Keratograph 5M and LacryDiag; 0.293 ± 0.0790 and 0.306 ± 0.0731. NITBUT also showed discordance between devices, F2, 111 = 13.152, p < 0.01. Measurements performed with LacryDiag were lower (10.4 ± 1.82) compared to those of Keratograph 5M (12.6 ± 4.01) and Antares (12.6 ± 4.21). Fleiss’ Kappa showed a value of -0.00487 for upper lid and 0.128 for inferior lid Meibography classification, suggesting discrete to poor agreement between measurements. CONCLUSION: Depending on the device used and parameter analyzed, measurements varied between each other, showing a difference in image processing. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-07-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9372285/ /pubmed/35966863 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.893688 Text en Copyright © 2022 Garcia-Terraza, Jimenez-Collado, Sanchez-Sanoja, Arteaga-Rivera, Morales Flores, Pérez-Solórzano, Garfias, Graue-Hernández and Navas. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Medicine Garcia-Terraza, Abril L. Jimenez-Collado, David Sanchez-Sanoja, Francisco Arteaga-Rivera, José Y. Morales Flores, Norma Pérez-Solórzano, Sofía Garfias, Yonathan Graue-Hernández, Enrique O. Navas, Alejandro Reliability, repeatability, and accordance between three different corneal diagnostic imaging devices for evaluating the ocular surface |
title | Reliability, repeatability, and accordance between three different corneal diagnostic imaging devices for evaluating the ocular surface |
title_full | Reliability, repeatability, and accordance between three different corneal diagnostic imaging devices for evaluating the ocular surface |
title_fullStr | Reliability, repeatability, and accordance between three different corneal diagnostic imaging devices for evaluating the ocular surface |
title_full_unstemmed | Reliability, repeatability, and accordance between three different corneal diagnostic imaging devices for evaluating the ocular surface |
title_short | Reliability, repeatability, and accordance between three different corneal diagnostic imaging devices for evaluating the ocular surface |
title_sort | reliability, repeatability, and accordance between three different corneal diagnostic imaging devices for evaluating the ocular surface |
topic | Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9372285/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35966863 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.893688 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT garciaterrazaabrill reliabilityrepeatabilityandaccordancebetweenthreedifferentcornealdiagnosticimagingdevicesforevaluatingtheocularsurface AT jimenezcolladodavid reliabilityrepeatabilityandaccordancebetweenthreedifferentcornealdiagnosticimagingdevicesforevaluatingtheocularsurface AT sanchezsanojafrancisco reliabilityrepeatabilityandaccordancebetweenthreedifferentcornealdiagnosticimagingdevicesforevaluatingtheocularsurface AT arteagariverajosey reliabilityrepeatabilityandaccordancebetweenthreedifferentcornealdiagnosticimagingdevicesforevaluatingtheocularsurface AT moralesfloresnorma reliabilityrepeatabilityandaccordancebetweenthreedifferentcornealdiagnosticimagingdevicesforevaluatingtheocularsurface AT perezsolorzanosofia reliabilityrepeatabilityandaccordancebetweenthreedifferentcornealdiagnosticimagingdevicesforevaluatingtheocularsurface AT garfiasyonathan reliabilityrepeatabilityandaccordancebetweenthreedifferentcornealdiagnosticimagingdevicesforevaluatingtheocularsurface AT grauehernandezenriqueo reliabilityrepeatabilityandaccordancebetweenthreedifferentcornealdiagnosticimagingdevicesforevaluatingtheocularsurface AT navasalejandro reliabilityrepeatabilityandaccordancebetweenthreedifferentcornealdiagnosticimagingdevicesforevaluatingtheocularsurface |