May 2006
Volume 47, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2006
Measurement of Central Corneal Thickness With Ultrasound, Orbscan and Optical Coherence Tomography in Ocular Hypertension
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • J.A. Duran
    ICQO, Instituto de Oftalmologia, Vizcaya, Spain
  • I.R. Agirretxe, Jr.
    ICQO, Instituto de Oftalmologia, Vizcaya, Spain
  • A. Acera
    ICQO, Instituto de Oftalmologia, Vizcaya, Spain
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  J.A. Duran, None; I.R. Agirretxe, None; A. Acera, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2006, Vol.47, 1337. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      J.A. Duran, I.R. Agirretxe, Jr., A. Acera; Measurement of Central Corneal Thickness With Ultrasound, Orbscan and Optical Coherence Tomography in Ocular Hypertension . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006;47(13):1337.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To compare central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements using ultrasonic pachymetry (US), Orbscan slit–scanning topography (ORB) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) in ocular hypertension (OHT).

Methods: : CCT was measured in 50 eyes from 29 patients with OHT. OHT was defined as intraocular pressure (IOP) > 21 mmHg, normal optic disc and normal visual fields (Humprey SITA standard 24/2). Measurements were performed in the morning, within 2 hours of each other to minimize diurnal variations, with US (Tomey SP 2000), ORB (Orbscan II) and OCT (OCT3). Statistical comparisons were carried out with ANOVA test for repeated measurements. Concordance between instruments was analysed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Correlation between IOP and CCT was studied by Pearson coefficient. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant

Results: : There were differences between instruments in measurement of CCT (US: 573.42 ± 35.3 µm; ORB: 583.98 ± 37.4; OCT: 564.15 ± 37.9; P<0.001 ANOVA). ORB was significantly higher than US and OCT (P<0.001, contrast analysis). There were no differences between US–OCT (P=0.42, contrast analysis). Concordance between instruments was high (ICC US–ORB: 0.9; ICC US–OCT: 0.91; ICC ORB–OCT: 0.88; P<0.001). There were no correlation between IOP–US (r=–0.18; P=0.2) and a weak negative correlation between IOP–ORB (r=–0.34; P=0.01) and IOP–OCT (r=–0.33; P=0.03).

Conclusions: : There are no differences between US and OCT pachymetry in OHT patients. In contrast ORB measurements are higher than those made using US or OCT. There is a high concordance between instruments in CCT determination. In OHT patients there is no positive correlation between IOP and CCT.

Keywords: cornea: clinical science • intraocular pressure 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×