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|
Lynn, Michael J.
Ambrosio, Renato [UNIFESP]
Dupps, William J.
Krueger, Ronald R.
Klyce, Stephen D.
Emory Eye Ctr
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)
|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.|
|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.