Comparison of anterior segment optical tomography parameters measured using a semi-automatic software to standard clinical instruments.
Comparison of anterior segment optical tomography parameters measured using a semi-automatic software to standard clinical instruments.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0065559
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Mehta JS
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ang M;Chong W;Huang H;Tay WT;Wong TY;He MG;Aung T;Mehta JS
比较应用于眼前节光学相干断层扫描（AS-OCT）图像的半自动软件（中山角评估程序，ZAP）与常用仪器测量的眼前节参数。对来自三项基于人群的研究的共计1069例受试者（1069只眼）进行的横断面研究，研究对象为40-80岁的成人。所有受试者均接受AS-OCT成像，并应用ZAP软件确定前房深度（ACD）、中央角膜厚度（CCT）、前房角膜曲率（K）读数。将这些结果分别与使用IOLMaster、超声测厚仪和自动验光仪测量的自动验光、角膜曲率和眼部生物测量进行比较。使用Bland-Altman 95%一致性限（LOA）描述AS-OCT（ZAP）和临床仪器模式之间的一致性。受试者的平均年龄为56.9±9.5岁，50.9%为男性。我们研究队列的平均AS-OCT（ZAP）参数为：ACD 3.29±0.35 mm，CCT 560.75±35.07 µm; K读数46.79±2.72 D。ZAP分析和每种仪器的测量结果之间具有良好的一致性，并且没有违反LOA的假设;尽管每次比较都存在系统性偏倚：与IOLMaster相比，AS-OCT始终测量到更深的ACD（95% LOA −0.24，0.55）; AS-OCT的CCT比超声测厚（16.8±0.53 µm，95% LOA −17.3，50.8）更厚。AS-OCT与自动验光仪具有良好的一致性，至少95%的测量值在预测区间内（P值<0.001）。本研究表明，AS-OCT（ZAP）和传统工具的测量结果之间具有良好的一致性。然而，小的系统偏差仍然存在，这表明这些测量工具可能无法互换。
To compare anterior segment parameters measured using a semi-automatic software (Zhongshan Angle Assessment Program, ZAP) applied to anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) images, with commonly used instruments. Cross-sectional study of a total of 1069 subjects (1069 eyes) from three population-based studies of adults aged 40–80 years. All subjects underwent AS-OCT imaging and ZAP software was applied to determine anterior chamber depth (ACD), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior and keratometry (K) – readings. These were compared to auto-refraction, keratometry and ocular biometry measured using an IOLMaster, ultrasound pachymeter and auto-refractor respectively. Agreements between AS-OCT (ZAP) and clinical instrument modalities were described using Bland-Altman, 95% limits of agreement (LOA). The mean age of our subjects was 56.9±9.5 years and 50.9% were male. The mean AS-OCT (ZAP) parameters of our study cohort were: ACD 3.29±0.35 mm, CCT 560.75±35.07 µm; K-reading 46.79±2.72 D. There was good agreement between the measurements from ZAP analysis and each instrument and no violations in the assumptions of the LOA; albeit with a systematic bias for each comparison: AS-OCT consistently measured a deeper ACD compared to IOLMaster (95% LOA −0.24, 0.55); and a thicker CCT for the AS-OCT compared to ultrasound pachymetry (16.8±0.53 µm 95% LOA −17.3, 50.8). AS-OCT had good agreement with auto-refractor with at least 95% of the measurements within the prediction interval (P value <0.001). This study demonstrates that there is good agreement between the measurements from the AS-OCT (ZAP) and conventional tools. However, small systematic biases remain that suggest that these measurement tools may not be interchanged.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
--
作者：
Sakata, Lisandro M.;Lavanya, Raghavan;Aung, Tin
通讯作者：
Aung, Tin
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Dinc, Umut Asli;Gorgun, Ebru;Alimgil, Levent
通讯作者：
Alimgil, Levent
影响因子：
2.8
作者：
Avila, Mariana;Li, Yan;Huang, David
通讯作者：
Huang, David
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
Lavanya, Raghavan;Teo, Livia;Aung, Tin
通讯作者：
Aung, Tin
影响因子：
2.4
作者：
Yazici, Ahmet Taylan;Bozkurt, Ercument;Yilmaz, Omer Faruk
通讯作者：
Yilmaz, Omer Faruk