Pentacam AXL与IOLMaster 700测量人工晶状体度数计算参数的比较

doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2020.02.009

摘要
图/表
参考文献(17)
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF 719KB HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要

目的：比较Pentacam AXL与IOLMaster 700两种生物测量仪测量人工晶状体（IOL）度数计算所需眼轴长度（AL）、角膜曲率、散光大小及轴向、前房深度（ACD）等参数的差异性及一致性。方法：前瞻性对照研究。收集2019年1—5月在厦门大学附属厦门眼科中心就诊的白内障患者92例（106）眼，同一观察者分别应用Pentacam AXL与IOLMaster 700测量AL、角膜曲率（K1、K2、Km）、散光大小及轴向（矢量表示法J0，J45）、ACD。分析2种生物测量仪测量参数结果的差异性和相关性，2种仪器测量结果的差异性采用t检验，相关性采用Pearson检验，一致性采用Bland-Altman法分析。结果： Pentacam AXL与IOLMaster 700测量的AL平均值分别为（23.63±2.06）mm和（23.64±2.05）mm，Km 值分别为（44.37±1.70）D和（44.45±1.71）D，J0分别为（0.011±0.555）D和（0.009±0.598）D，J45分别为（0.002±0.278）D和（0.013±0.289）D，ACD值分别为（2.96±0.41）mm和（2.91±0.41）mm，差异均无统计学意义（t=0.035，P=0.972；t=0.348，P=0.728；t=-0.020，P=0.984；t=0.300，P=0.764； t=-0.931，P=0.407），且均具有良好的相关性（r=1.000、0.988、0.911、0.811、0.994，均P<0.001）。 Bland-Altman一致性分析显示，2种仪器对AL、J0、J45、ACD的测量具有较好的一致性，分别为 -0.01 mm（95%LoA：-0.07～0.05 mm），0 D（95%LoA：-0.48～0.48 D），-0.01 D（95%LoA： -0.35～0.33 D）及0.05 mm（95%LoA：0～0.09 mm）。而Km为-0.08 D（95%LoA：-0.59～0.43 D）。结论： Pentacam AXL与IOLMaster 700测量参数间差异无统计学意义，AL、ACD及散光具有良好的一致性，可替换使用，而在角膜曲率测量方面变异幅度较大，替换使用需谨慎。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章

关键词 ：白内障, 人工晶状体, 生物测量, Pentacam AXL, IOLMaster 700

Abstract：

Objective: To evaluate the differences and consistency inaxial length, corneal curvature, anterior chamber depth and astigmatism in cataract patientsmeasured by Pentacam AXL and IOLMaster 700. Methods: This was a prospective controlled study. Ninety cataract patients (106 eyes) were enrolled in Xiamen Eye Center of Xiamen University from January to May 2019. Biometry measurements were performed by the same examiner with Pentacam AXL and IOLMaster 700. The axial length (AL), keratometry reading (K1, K2, Km), J0 and J45 vectoral components of astigmatism and anterior chamber depth (ACD) were obtained. The difference between the two instruments was analyzed. Differences and correlations of biometry measurements obtained with the two biometers were analyzed. The agreement between the two biometers was analyzed by Bland-Altman plot. Results: There were no significant differences in AL, Km, J0, J45 or ACD (t=0.035, P=0.972; t=0.348, P=0.728; t=-0.020, P=0.984; t=0.300, P=0.764; t=-0.931, P=0.407) between Pentacam AXL and IOLMaster 700 (23.63±2.06 mm vs. 23.64±2.05 mm, 44.37±1.70 D vs. 44.45±1.71 D, 0.011±0.555 D vs. 0.009±0.598 D, 0.002±0.278 D vs. 0.013±0.289 D, 2.96±0.41 mm vs. 2.91±0.41 mm). All of the biometric parameters showed good correlation (r=1.000, 0.988, 0.911, 0.811, 0.994, P<0.01). The Bland-Altman analysis of AL, J0, J45, ACD with Pentacam AXL and IOLMaster 700 showed a mean difference of 0.01 mm (95%LoA: -0.07-0.05 mm), 0 D (95%LoA: -0.48-0.48 D), -0.01 D (95%LoA: -0.35-0.33 D) and 0.05 mm (95%LoA: 0-0.09 mm) between the 2 devices, respectively, while the mean difference in Km was -0.08 D (95%LoA: -0.59-0.43 D). Conclusions: There is no significant difference in biometric parameters between Pentacam AXL and IOLMaster 700; the 2 devices can be used interchangeably to measure AL, J0, J45 and ACD in cataract patients. However, the Kmvalue is not interchangeable since the devices have a slightly larger variation in measurements.

Key words： cataract intraocular lens biometer Pentacam AXL IOLMaster 700

收稿日期: 2019-06-19

通讯作者: 张广斌（ORCID：0000-0003-3132-0675），Email：386975604@qq.com

引用本文:

曾宗圣张广斌. Pentacam AXL与IOLMaster 700测量人工晶状体度数计算参数的比较[J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2020, 22(2): 130-135. Zongsheng Zeng, Guangbin Zhang. Comparison of the Parameters for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Cataract Patients Measured by Pentacam AXL and IOLMaster 700. Chinese Journal of Optometry Ophthalmology and Visual science, 2020, 22(2): 130-135. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2020.02.009

链接本文:

http://www.cjoovs.com/CN/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2020.02.009 或 http://www.cjoovs.com/CN/Y2020/V22/I2/130

[1]	Saad E, Shammas MC, Shammas HJ. Scheimpflug corneal power measurements for intraocular lens power calculation in cataract surgery. Am J Ophthalmol, 2013, 156(3): 460-467. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2013.04.035.
[2]	Asena L, Akman A, Güng?r SG, et al. Comparison of keratometry obtained by a swept source OCT-based biometer with a standard optical biometer and scheimpflug imaging. Curr Eye Res, 2018, 43(7): 882-888. DOI: 10.1080/02713683.2018.1458881.
[3]	?zyol P, ?zyol E. Agreement between swept-source optical biometry and scheimpflug-based topography measurements of anterior segment parameters. Am J Ophthalmol, 2016, 169: 73-78. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2016.06.020.
[4]	Sel S, Stange J, Kaiser D, et al. Repeatability and agreement of scheimpflug-based and swept-source optical biometry measurements. Cont Lens Anterior Eye, 2017, 40(5): 318-322. DOI: 10.1016/j.clae.2017.03.007.
[5]	Shajari M, Cremonese C, Petermann K, et al. Comparison of axial length, corneal curvature, and anterior chamber depth measurements of 2 recently introduced devices to a known biometer. Am J Ophthalmol, 2017, 178: 58-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2017.02.027.
[6]	Akman A, Asena L, Güng?r SG. Evaluation and comparison of the new swept source OCT-based IOLMaster 700 with the IOLMaster 500. Br J Ophthalmol, 2016, 100(9): 1201-1205. DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307779.
[7]	崔蕊, 杨文利, 李栋军, 等. IOLMaster 700与IOLMaster 500测量白内障术前眼轴长度的一致性及检出率比较. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2018, 20(11): 659-662. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2018.11.004.
[8]	Thibos LN, Wheeler W, Horner D. Power vectors: An application of Fourier analysis to the description and statistical analysis of refractive error. Optom Vis Sci, 1997, 74(6): 367-375. DOI: 10.1097/00006324-199706000-00019.
[9]	Sayed KM, Alsamman AH. Interchangeability between Pentacam and IOLMaster in phakic intraocular lens calculation. Eur J Ophthalmol, 2015, 25(3): 202-207. DOI: 10.5301/ejo.5000524.
[10]	Eibschitz-Tsimhoni M, Tsimhoni O, Archer SM, et al. Effect of axial length and keratometry measurement error on intraocular lens implant power prediction formulas in pediatric patients. J AAPOS, 2008, 12(2): 173-176. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2007.10. 012.
[11]	Huang J, Savini G, Chen H, et al. Precision and agreement of corneal power measurements obtained using a new corneal topographer Ophtha TOP. PLoS One, 2015, 10(1): e109414. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109414.
[12]	Fu Y, Yu X, Savini G, et al. Assessment of corneal keratometric and astigmatism measurements using verion system and other instruments in cataract patient. Curr Eye Res, 2018, 43(10): 1205-1214. DOI: 10.1080/02713683.2018.1488264.
[13]	Németh G, Hassan Z, Módis L Jr, et al. Comparison of anterior chamber depth measurements conducted with Pentacam HR?and IOLMaster?. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging, 2011, 42(2): 144-147. DOI: 10.3928/15428877-20110210-03.
[14]	Rozema JJ, Wouters K, Mathysen DG, et al. Overview of the repeatability, reproducibility, and agreement of the biometry values provided by various ophthalmic devices. Am J Ophthalmol, 2014, 158(6): 1111-1120. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2014.08.014.
[15]	Hamoudi H, Correll Christensen U, la Cour M. Agreement of phakic and pseudophakic anterior chamber depth measurements in IOLMaster and Pentacam. Acta Ophthalmol, 2018, 96(3): e403. DOI: 10.1111/aos.13599.
[16]	潘超, 黄锦海, 林华尤, 等. Galilei Ⅱ、Pentacam和IOLMaster测量前房深度的比较. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2013, 15(9): 547-550. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2013.09.
	009.
[17]	Lackner B, Schmidinger G, Skorpik C. Validity and repeatability of anterior chamber depth measurements with Pentacam and Orbscan. Optom Vis Sci, 2005, 82(9): 858-861. DOI: 10.1097/01.opx.0000177804.53192.15.