June 2022
Volume 63, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2022
Accordance between three corneal diagnostic imaging devices in measuring the ocular surface
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Alejandro Navas
    Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Abril L García-Terraza
    Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • David Jimenez-Collado
    Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
    Universidad Panamericana, Ciudad de Mexico, Ciudad de México, Mexico
  • Francisco Sánchez-Sanoja
    Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • José Y Arteaga-Rivera
    Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Norma Morales
    Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Sofía Pérez-Solórzano
    Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Arturo Ramírez-Miranda
    Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Enrique O Graue-Hernandez
    Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Alejandro Navas None; Abril García-Terraza None; David Jimenez-Collado None; Francisco Sánchez-Sanoja None; José Arteaga-Rivera None; Norma Morales None; Sofía Pérez-Solórzano None; Arturo Ramírez-Miranda None; Enrique Graue-Hernandez None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2022, Vol.63, 1512 – A0237. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Alejandro Navas, Abril L García-Terraza, David Jimenez-Collado, Francisco Sánchez-Sanoja, José Y Arteaga-Rivera, Norma Morales, Sofía Pérez-Solórzano, Arturo Ramírez-Miranda, Enrique O Graue-Hernandez; Accordance between three corneal diagnostic imaging devices in measuring the ocular surface. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2022;63(7):1512 – A0237.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To evaluate repeatability, reproducibility, and accordance between NITBUT, tear meniscus and meibography measurements within three different ocular surface imaging devices.

Methods : We performed an observational study on 66 healthy eyes. Tear meniscus, NITBUT (non-invasive tear break-up time) and meibography were measured using 3 types of corneal imaging devices: Keratograph 5M (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany), Antares (Lumenis, Sidney, Australia) and LacryDiag (Quantel Medical, Cournon d’Auvergne, France). One-way ANOVAs and Welch ANOVAs were used to calculate correlation. Reliability and accordance between the tear meniscus and NITBUT were defined using Tukey Honest Significant Differences, Bonferroni corrections and plotted in Tukey mean difference plots. Accordance from meibography classification was analyzed by calculating Fleiss' Kappa Index and presented visually in Venn diagrams.

Results : 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 both the Keratograph5M and LacryDiag; 0.293±0.0790 and 0.306±0.0731. NITBUT measurements 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 obtained with Keratograph5M (12.6±4.01) and Antares (12.6±4.21). Fleiss' Kappa coefficient showed a value of -0.00487 for the upper lid and 0.128 for the inferior lid Meibography classification, suggesting discrete to poor agreement between measurements.

Conclusions : Depending on the device used and the parameter analyzed, measurements varied between each other, showing difference in image processing.

This abstract was presented at the 2022 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Denver, CO, May 1-4, 2022, and virtually.

×
×

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.

×