Agreement between a new swept-source ocular coherence tomography and a Placido disc-dual Scheimpflug ocular biometric devices

Agreement between a new swept-source ocular coherence tomography and a Placido disc-dual Scheimpflug ocular biometric devices

Purpose To evaluate the agreement between two biometry devices, the Heidelberg Anterion and the Galilei G6 Lens Professional. Methods Eyes were scanned with both biometry devices. Analysis of inter-device agreement was conducted for the following metrics: flat (K1), steep (K2) and mean K (Km) for an...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of ophthalmology 2023-03, Vol.33 (2), p.905-911
Hauptverfasser: McLintock, Cameron, Niyazmand, Hamed, Seo, Shiney, Barrett, Graham, Kumar Nilagiri, Vinay, Karimian, Sahar, McKelvie, James
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 911
container_issue 2
container_start_page 905
container_title European journal of ophthalmology
container_volume 33
creator McLintock, Cameron
Niyazmand, Hamed
Seo, Shiney
Barrett, Graham
Kumar Nilagiri, Vinay
Karimian, Sahar
McKelvie, James
description Purpose To evaluate the agreement between two biometry devices, the Heidelberg Anterion and the Galilei G6 Lens Professional. Methods Eyes were scanned with both biometry devices. Analysis of inter-device agreement was conducted for the following metrics: flat (K1), steep (K2) and mean K (Km) for anterior, posterior and total cornea, lens thickness (LT), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), white to white (WTW) and axial length (AL). Generalised Estimating Equations were used to account for inter-eye correlation. Bland-Altman analysis was conducted to derive the mean difference (MD) and limits of agreement (LoA) between devices. Differences were deemed clinically significant if they would result in a change in post-operative refraction of 0.25D or more. Results 159 eyes of 91 patients were included. For the anterior cornea, no significant MD was found for K1 (−0.11D) and K2 (−0.10D), although a significant MD was found for Km (−0.10D). For posterior cornea, while there were no significant MDs between devices, the LoAs were wide for both posterior K1(−0.70, 0.68) and posterior K2 (−1.01, 1.29). For total corneal power, significant MDs were found in K1 (0.36D), and Km (0.26D) but not for K2 (0.17D). Significant MDs were found for LT (0.179mm), CCT (−0.005mm), ACD (−0.111mm) and WTW (−0.158mm), but not for AL (−0.021mm, p > 0.05). Conclusion: There are statistically but not clinically significant differences between Anterion and Galilei G6 Lens Professional in anterior Km, LT, CCT, ACD and WTW. Measurements of the posterior and total cornea are not interchangeable between devices.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/11206721221143160
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>sage_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_11206721221143160</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_11206721221143160</sage_id><sourcerecordid>10.1177_11206721221143160</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c340t-9c048c2c58ac5065da0589c2d838ceb9b5b585b9c6449ef01ec49f09a0e1b1383</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AQhhdRbK3-AC-yfyB1Z7ObZI-l-AUFBfUcNpNJm5IvdhNLD_53U6peBE8zzLzPwDyMXYOYA8TxLYAUUSxBSgAVQiRO2BRiqYJIQHQ69uM-OAQm7ML7rRBSGCXP2SSMVKwN6Cn7XKwdUU1NzzPqd0QNt7yhHfc76vrAt4ND4i0OlXUc2w05asZB39bt2tlus-e2yUfkpbJY5i3PS49BPtiKv-KGyrorqmH9w2dlW1PvSuQ5fZRI_pKdFbbydPVdZ-z9_u5t-Risnh-elotVgKESfWBQqAQl6sSiFpHOrdCJQZknYYKUmUxnOtGZwUgpQ4UAQmUKYawgyCBMwhmD4110rfeOirRzZW3dPgWRHlSmf1SOzM2R6YaspvyX-HE3BubHgLdrSrejqWb84Z-LX7WHfZs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Agreement between a new swept-source ocular coherence tomography and a Placido disc-dual Scheimpflug ocular biometric devices</title><source>SAGE Complete</source><creator>McLintock, Cameron ; Niyazmand, Hamed ; Seo, Shiney ; Barrett, Graham ; Kumar Nilagiri, Vinay ; Karimian, Sahar ; McKelvie, James</creator><creatorcontrib>McLintock, Cameron ; Niyazmand, Hamed ; Seo, Shiney ; Barrett, Graham ; Kumar Nilagiri, Vinay ; Karimian, Sahar ; McKelvie, James</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose To evaluate the agreement between two biometry devices, the Heidelberg Anterion and the Galilei G6 Lens Professional. Methods Eyes were scanned with both biometry devices. Analysis of inter-device agreement was conducted for the following metrics: flat (K1), steep (K2) and mean K (Km) for anterior, posterior and total cornea, lens thickness (LT), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), white to white (WTW) and axial length (AL). Generalised Estimating Equations were used to account for inter-eye correlation. Bland-Altman analysis was conducted to derive the mean difference (MD) and limits of agreement (LoA) between devices. Differences were deemed clinically significant if they would result in a change in post-operative refraction of 0.25D or more. Results 159 eyes of 91 patients were included. For the anterior cornea, no significant MD was found for K1 (−0.11D) and K2 (−0.10D), although a significant MD was found for Km (−0.10D). For posterior cornea, while there were no significant MDs between devices, the LoAs were wide for both posterior K1(−0.70, 0.68) and posterior K2 (−1.01, 1.29). For total corneal power, significant MDs were found in K1 (0.36D), and Km (0.26D) but not for K2 (0.17D). Significant MDs were found for LT (0.179mm), CCT (−0.005mm), ACD (−0.111mm) and WTW (−0.158mm), but not for AL (−0.021mm, p &gt; 0.05). Conclusion: There are statistically but not clinically significant differences between Anterion and Galilei G6 Lens Professional in anterior Km, LT, CCT, ACD and WTW. Measurements of the posterior and total cornea are not interchangeable between devices.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1120-6721</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1724-6016</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/11206721221143160</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36475915</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><ispartof>European journal of ophthalmology, 2023-03, Vol.33 (2), p.905-911</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c340t-9c048c2c58ac5065da0589c2d838ceb9b5b585b9c6449ef01ec49f09a0e1b1383</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c340t-9c048c2c58ac5065da0589c2d838ceb9b5b585b9c6449ef01ec49f09a0e1b1383</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6460-4175 ; 0000-0002-9335-3213 ; 0000-0003-1762-2001 ; 0000-0001-8513-9324</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/11206721221143160$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/11206721221143160$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21798,27901,27902,43597,43598</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36475915$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>McLintock, Cameron</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Niyazmand, Hamed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seo, Shiney</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barrett, Graham</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kumar Nilagiri, Vinay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karimian, Sahar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKelvie, James</creatorcontrib><title>Agreement between a new swept-source ocular coherence tomography and a Placido disc-dual Scheimpflug ocular biometric devices</title><title>European journal of ophthalmology</title><addtitle>European Journal of Ophthalmology</addtitle><description>Purpose To evaluate the agreement between two biometry devices, the Heidelberg Anterion and the Galilei G6 Lens Professional. Methods Eyes were scanned with both biometry devices. Analysis of inter-device agreement was conducted for the following metrics: flat (K1), steep (K2) and mean K (Km) for anterior, posterior and total cornea, lens thickness (LT), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), white to white (WTW) and axial length (AL). Generalised Estimating Equations were used to account for inter-eye correlation. Bland-Altman analysis was conducted to derive the mean difference (MD) and limits of agreement (LoA) between devices. Differences were deemed clinically significant if they would result in a change in post-operative refraction of 0.25D or more. Results 159 eyes of 91 patients were included. For the anterior cornea, no significant MD was found for K1 (−0.11D) and K2 (−0.10D), although a significant MD was found for Km (−0.10D). For posterior cornea, while there were no significant MDs between devices, the LoAs were wide for both posterior K1(−0.70, 0.68) and posterior K2 (−1.01, 1.29). For total corneal power, significant MDs were found in K1 (0.36D), and Km (0.26D) but not for K2 (0.17D). Significant MDs were found for LT (0.179mm), CCT (−0.005mm), ACD (−0.111mm) and WTW (−0.158mm), but not for AL (−0.021mm, p &gt; 0.05). Conclusion: There are statistically but not clinically significant differences between Anterion and Galilei G6 Lens Professional in anterior Km, LT, CCT, ACD and WTW. Measurements of the posterior and total cornea are not interchangeable between devices.</description><issn>1120-6721</issn><issn>1724-6016</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AQhhdRbK3-AC-yfyB1Z7ObZI-l-AUFBfUcNpNJm5IvdhNLD_53U6peBE8zzLzPwDyMXYOYA8TxLYAUUSxBSgAVQiRO2BRiqYJIQHQ69uM-OAQm7ML7rRBSGCXP2SSMVKwN6Cn7XKwdUU1NzzPqd0QNt7yhHfc76vrAt4ND4i0OlXUc2w05asZB39bt2tlus-e2yUfkpbJY5i3PS49BPtiKv-KGyrorqmH9w2dlW1PvSuQ5fZRI_pKdFbbydPVdZ-z9_u5t-Risnh-elotVgKESfWBQqAQl6sSiFpHOrdCJQZknYYKUmUxnOtGZwUgpQ4UAQmUKYawgyCBMwhmD4110rfeOirRzZW3dPgWRHlSmf1SOzM2R6YaspvyX-HE3BubHgLdrSrejqWb84Z-LX7WHfZs</recordid><startdate>20230301</startdate><enddate>20230301</enddate><creator>McLintock, Cameron</creator><creator>Niyazmand, Hamed</creator><creator>Seo, Shiney</creator><creator>Barrett, Graham</creator><creator>Kumar Nilagiri, Vinay</creator><creator>Karimian, Sahar</creator><creator>McKelvie, James</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6460-4175</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9335-3213</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1762-2001</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8513-9324</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230301</creationdate><title>Agreement between a new swept-source ocular coherence tomography and a Placido disc-dual Scheimpflug ocular biometric devices</title><author>McLintock, Cameron ; Niyazmand, Hamed ; Seo, Shiney ; Barrett, Graham ; Kumar Nilagiri, Vinay ; Karimian, Sahar ; McKelvie, James</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c340t-9c048c2c58ac5065da0589c2d838ceb9b5b585b9c6449ef01ec49f09a0e1b1383</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>McLintock, Cameron</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Niyazmand, Hamed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seo, Shiney</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barrett, Graham</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kumar Nilagiri, Vinay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karimian, Sahar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKelvie, James</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>European journal of ophthalmology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>McLintock, Cameron</au><au>Niyazmand, Hamed</au><au>Seo, Shiney</au><au>Barrett, Graham</au><au>Kumar Nilagiri, Vinay</au><au>Karimian, Sahar</au><au>McKelvie, James</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Agreement between a new swept-source ocular coherence tomography and a Placido disc-dual Scheimpflug ocular biometric devices</atitle><jtitle>European journal of ophthalmology</jtitle><addtitle>European Journal of Ophthalmology</addtitle><date>2023-03-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>905</spage><epage>911</epage><pages>905-911</pages><issn>1120-6721</issn><eissn>1724-6016</eissn><abstract>Purpose To evaluate the agreement between two biometry devices, the Heidelberg Anterion and the Galilei G6 Lens Professional. Methods Eyes were scanned with both biometry devices. Analysis of inter-device agreement was conducted for the following metrics: flat (K1), steep (K2) and mean K (Km) for anterior, posterior and total cornea, lens thickness (LT), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), white to white (WTW) and axial length (AL). Generalised Estimating Equations were used to account for inter-eye correlation. Bland-Altman analysis was conducted to derive the mean difference (MD) and limits of agreement (LoA) between devices. Differences were deemed clinically significant if they would result in a change in post-operative refraction of 0.25D or more. Results 159 eyes of 91 patients were included. For the anterior cornea, no significant MD was found for K1 (−0.11D) and K2 (−0.10D), although a significant MD was found for Km (−0.10D). For posterior cornea, while there were no significant MDs between devices, the LoAs were wide for both posterior K1(−0.70, 0.68) and posterior K2 (−1.01, 1.29). For total corneal power, significant MDs were found in K1 (0.36D), and Km (0.26D) but not for K2 (0.17D). Significant MDs were found for LT (0.179mm), CCT (−0.005mm), ACD (−0.111mm) and WTW (−0.158mm), but not for AL (−0.021mm, p &gt; 0.05). Conclusion: There are statistically but not clinically significant differences between Anterion and Galilei G6 Lens Professional in anterior Km, LT, CCT, ACD and WTW. Measurements of the posterior and total cornea are not interchangeable between devices.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>36475915</pmid><doi>10.1177/11206721221143160</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6460-4175</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9335-3213</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1762-2001</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8513-9324</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1120-6721
ispartof European journal of ophthalmology, 2023-03, Vol.33 (2), p.905-911
issn 1120-6721
1724-6016
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_11206721221143160
source SAGE Complete
title Agreement between a new swept-source ocular coherence tomography and a Placido disc-dual Scheimpflug ocular biometric devices
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T18%3A46%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-sage_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Agreement%20between%20a%20new%20swept-source%20ocular%20coherence%20tomography%20and%20a%20Placido%20disc-dual%20Scheimpflug%20ocular%20biometric%20devices&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20ophthalmology&rft.au=McLintock,%20Cameron&rft.date=2023-03-01&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=905&rft.epage=911&rft.pages=905-911&rft.issn=1120-6721&rft.eissn=1724-6016&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/11206721221143160&rft_dat=%3Csage_cross%3E10.1177_11206721221143160%3C/sage_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/36475915&rft_sage_id=10.1177_11206721221143160&rfr_iscdi=true