scholarly journals Measurement of central corneal thickness by high-resolution Scheimpflug imaging, Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography and ultrasound pachymetry

2010 ◽  
Vol 90 (5) ◽  
pp. 449-455 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shihao Chen ◽  
Jinhai Huang ◽  
Daizong Wen ◽  
Wuhe Chen ◽  
David Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Optical Coherence Tomography ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Central Corneal Thickness ◽  
Corneal Thickness ◽  
Fourier Domain ◽  
Optical Coherence ◽  
Ultrasound Pachymetry ◽  
Scheimpflug Imaging

scholarly journals Indications of Optical Coherence Tomography in Keratoplasties: Literature Review

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thiago Trindade Nesi ◽  
Daniel Amorim Leite ◽  
Fábio Medina Rocha ◽  
Marco Antônio Tanure ◽  
Pedro Paulo Reis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Optical Coherence Tomography ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Early Identification ◽  
Central Corneal Thickness ◽  
Corneal Thickness ◽  
Anterior Segment ◽  
Secondary Glaucoma ◽  
Optical Coherence

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) of the anterior segment, in particular corneal OCT, has become a reliable tool for the cornea specialist, as it provides the acquisition of digital images at high resolution with a noncontact technology. In penetrating or lamellar keratoplasties, OCT can be used to assess central corneal thickness and pachymetry maps, as well as precise measurements of deep stromal opacities, thereby guiding the surgeon to choose the best treatment option. OCT has also been used to evaluate the keratoplasty postoperative period, for early identification of possible complications, such as secondary glaucoma or donor disc detachments in endothelial keratoplasties. Intraoperatively, OCT can be used to assess stromal bed regularity and transparency in anterior lamellar surgeries, especially for those techniques in which a bare Descemet’s membrane is the goal. The purpose of this paper is to review and discuss the role of OCT as a diagnostic tool in various types of keratoplasties.

scholarly journals Comparison of Central Corneal Thickness Measurements between Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography, Ultrasound Pachymetry and Ocular Biometry

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
E. Pateras ◽  
A. I. Kouroupaki
Keyword(s):  
Optical Coherence Tomography ◽  
Central Corneal Thickness ◽  
Corneal Thickness ◽  
Repeated Measurements ◽  
Optical Coherence ◽  
Swept Source ◽  
Ocular Biometry ◽  
Significant Linear Correlation ◽  
Ultrasound Pachymetry ◽  
The Mean

Purpose: To compare central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements and their reproducibility when taken by Ultrasound Pachymetry, Ocular Biometry and Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT). Methods: Twenty-five healthy volunteers were recruited creating a sample size of 50 eyes. All subjects had pachymetric measurements by Ultrasound pachymetry (PachPen Handheld Pachymeter, Keeler Instruments Inc), Ocular biometry (IOL Master 700 Swept Source Biometry, Zeiss) and Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography (Optovue Avanti RTVue XR Angiovue). The measurements of central corneal thickness for the three devices were taken by the same examiner twice for more accuracy. Results: The average measurements of central corneal thickness by Ultrasound pachymetry (PachPen Handheld Pachymeter, Keeler Instruments Inc), Ocular biometry (IOL Master 700 Swept Source Biometry, Zeiss) and Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography (Optovue Avanti RTVue XR Angiovue) were 547.26 μm, 551.36 μm, and 536.42 μm, respectively. The mean standard deviation (SD) of repeated measurements by Ocular biometry was 48.87 μm, which was greater than the mean SD of 44.24 μm and 40.35 μm (P < 0.001) by ultrasound pachymetry and Angiovue optical coherence tomography, respectively. There were statistically significant differences in the measurement results among the 3 methods (Ultrasound pachymetry vs. Ocular biometry P = 0.019; Ultrasound pachymetry vs. Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography; P < 0.001; Ocular biometry vs. Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography P < 0.001). There was a significant linear correlation between the Ultrasound pachymetry and Ocular biometry (r = 0.945, P<0.001), Ultrasound pachymetry and Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography (r = 0.895, P<0.001), and Ocular biometry and Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography (r = 0.902, P<0.001). Conclusion: Central corneal thickness readings were comparable between PachPen Handheld Pachymeter, IOL Master 700 Biometry and Angiovue Optical Coherence Tomography; Angiovue optical coherence tomography gave significantly smaller values. The measurements of the 3 methods showed significant linear correlations with one another. All methods provided acceptable repeatability of measurements.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document