TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of Horizontal Corneal Diameter Measurements Using Orbscan IIz, OPD Scan III, and IOLMaster 700
AU - Cruz, Sebastian
AU - Valenzuela, Felipe
AU - Stoppel, Juan
AU - Maul, Eugenio
AU - Gibbons, Allister
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/10/1
Y1 - 2021/10/1
N2 - Purpose:To compare three automated devices for measuring the horizontal corneal diameter (white to white [WTW]).Methods:In 65 eyes of 38 patients, the WTW distance was measured independently by three examiners using the following techniques: Orbscan IIz tomography system (Bausch & Lomb), IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec), and OPD Scan III (NIDEK). We tested for systematic differences in measurements and estimated the limits of agreement (LoA) using linear mixed-effects models.Results:The mean WTW distance was 11.8±0.40 mm with Orbscan IIz, 12.1±0.5 mm with IOLMaster 700 and 12.0±0.4 mm with OPD Scan III. The mean difference between IOLMaster 700 and Orbscan IIz was 0.33 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.38; P<0.001), between OPD Scan III and Orbscan IIz was 0.24 mm (95% CI, 0.21 to 0.28; P<0.001), and between IOL Master 700 and OPD Scan III was 0.09 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.12; P<0.001). The 95% LoA for Orbscan IIz versus IOLMaster 700 was -0.69 to 0.03 mm, Orbscan IIz versus OPD Scan III was -0.52 to -0.03 mm, and OPD versus IOLMaster 700 was -0.39 to 0.22 mm.Conclusions:The data suggest that these devices are not interchangeable for usual clinical practice. Adjustments based on mean differences were not enough to compensate for interinstrument discrepancy in WTW measurements.
AB - Purpose:To compare three automated devices for measuring the horizontal corneal diameter (white to white [WTW]).Methods:In 65 eyes of 38 patients, the WTW distance was measured independently by three examiners using the following techniques: Orbscan IIz tomography system (Bausch & Lomb), IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec), and OPD Scan III (NIDEK). We tested for systematic differences in measurements and estimated the limits of agreement (LoA) using linear mixed-effects models.Results:The mean WTW distance was 11.8±0.40 mm with Orbscan IIz, 12.1±0.5 mm with IOLMaster 700 and 12.0±0.4 mm with OPD Scan III. The mean difference between IOLMaster 700 and Orbscan IIz was 0.33 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.38; P<0.001), between OPD Scan III and Orbscan IIz was 0.24 mm (95% CI, 0.21 to 0.28; P<0.001), and between IOL Master 700 and OPD Scan III was 0.09 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.12; P<0.001). The 95% LoA for Orbscan IIz versus IOLMaster 700 was -0.69 to 0.03 mm, Orbscan IIz versus OPD Scan III was -0.52 to -0.03 mm, and OPD versus IOLMaster 700 was -0.39 to 0.22 mm.Conclusions:The data suggest that these devices are not interchangeable for usual clinical practice. Adjustments based on mean differences were not enough to compensate for interinstrument discrepancy in WTW measurements.
KW - Corneal diameter
KW - IOLMaster 700
KW - OPD scan III
KW - Orbscan IIz
KW - White-to-white distance
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85117425674
U2 - 10.1097/ICL.0000000000000786
DO - 10.1097/ICL.0000000000000786
M3 - Article
C2 - 33900214
AN - SCOPUS:85117425674
SN - 1542-2321
VL - 47
SP - 533
EP - 538
JO - Eye and Contact Lens
JF - Eye and Contact Lens
IS - 10
ER -