Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Comparison of objective and subjective refractive surgery screening parameters between regular and high-resolution Scheimpflug imaging devices
Authors: Randleman, J. Bradley
Akhtar, Jihan
Lynn, Michael J.
Ambrosio, Renato [UNIFESP]
Dupps, William J.
Krueger, Ronald R.
Klyce, Stephen D.
Emory Univ
Emory Vis
Emory Eye Ctr
Cleveland Clin
Case Western Reserve Univ
Mt Sinai Sch Med
Inst Olhos Renato Ambrosio
Rio de Janeiro Corneal Tomog & Biomech Study Grp
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
Issue Date: 1-Feb-2015
Publisher: Elsevier B.V.
Citation: Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery. New York: Elsevier B.V., v. 41, n. 2, p. 286-294, 2015.
Abstract: PURPOSE: To compare objective and subjective metrics from regular and high-resolution Scheimpflug devices (Pentacam) to determine their equivalence and interchangeability for refractive surgery screening.SETTING: Emory Vision at Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.DESIGN: Retrospective comparative case series.METHODS: Eyes of consecutive screened refractive surgery patients were evaluated with high-resolution and regular Scheimpflug devices. Objective parameters evaluated included keratometry (K) values, central corneal thickness (CCT), and device-generated keratoconus screening indices. Masked expert reviewers subjectively graded images as normal, suspicious, or abnormal.RESULTS: One hundred eyes of 50 patients were evaluated. the mean K values were not significantly different (anterior K: high resolution 1.21 diopters [ID] +/- 1.13 (SD) versus regular 1.15 +/- 1.16 D, P = 0.73; posterior K: 0.34 +/- 0.23 D versus regular 0.35 +/- 0.23 D, P =.67). the mean CCT was significantly thinner in the high-resolution group (514.7 +/- 26.6 mu m versus 527.6 +/- 27.6 mu m (P <.0001) with limits of agreement of -12.9 to +/- 17.5 mu m. Most keratoconus screening indices were more suspicious with the high-resolution device than with the regular device except the indices of height asymmetry and height deviation. Subjectively, 60% of cases received the same score, high resolution was more suspicious in 28% of cases, and regular was more suspicious in 12% of cases; there was only slight subjective agreement between technologies (K = 0.26 to 0.31).CONCLUSIONS: Regular and high-resolution Scheimpflug imaging devices generated different objective values and significantly different subjective interpretations with poor inter-reviewer agreement. the high-resolution device provided a more conservative overall output. for refractive surgical screening, the 2 devices are not interchangeable.
ISSN: 0886-3350
Other Identifiers:
Appears in Collections:Em verificação - Geral

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.