File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Measurement of LASIK flap thickness with anterior segment optical coherence tomography

TitleMeasurement of LASIK flap thickness with anterior segment optical coherence tomography
Authors
Issue Date2008
Citation
Journal of Refractive Surgery, 2008, v. 24, n. 9, p. 879-884 How to Cite?
AbstractPURPOSE: To assess the interobserver variability and agreement of anterior segment optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the measurement of LASIK flap thickness, and to compare the results with intraoperative ultrasound pachymetry measurements. METHODS: Thirty-nine eyes of 20 consecutive patients undergoing LASIK with the XP microkeratome (Bausch & Lomb) and ALLEGRETTO Eye-Q laser system (Wave-Light Inc) had corneal flap thickness measured with SP-100 ultrasound (Tomey Corp) intraoperatively and with OCT (Visante; Carl Zeiss Meditec Inc) postoperatively. Interobserver assessment was performed by comparing the flap thickness measurements obtained from the same scan by 2 masked, independent observers. Agreement of OCT scan was determined by assessment of 2 different scans of the same eye by the same observer. RESULTS: Mean (±standard deviation) flap thickness measured by ultrasound, OCT scan 1 (OCT 1-1) and scan 2 (OCT 1-2) assessed by observer 1, and OCT scan 1 (OCT 2-1) and scan 2 (OCT 2-2) assessed by observer 2 were 112.79±19.71, 124.69±17.02, 127.59±17.32, 130.59±20.34, and 133.74±19.70 μm, respectively. No statistically significant difference among the interobserver measurements was seen. The difference between OCT and ultrasound measurements by observers 1 and 2 was statistically significant (P<.01). Correlation among all measurements was statistically significant. Good agreement among the OCT scans was noted. CONCLUSIONS: Optical coherence tomography showed good correlation among measurements and observers for different OCT measurements in the assessment of corneal flap thickness after LASIK. However, OCT significantly overestimated flap thickness when compared to ultrasound despite a good correlation between these two modalities. Optical coherence tomography measurements should not be substituted for standad ultrasound measurements at the present time.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/298466
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 2.9
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.477
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCheng, Arthur C.K.-
dc.contributor.authorHo, Thomas-
dc.contributor.authorLau, Silvania-
dc.contributor.authorWong, Amy L.-
dc.contributor.authorLeung, Chris-
dc.contributor.authorLam, Dennis S.C.-
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-08T03:08:29Z-
dc.date.available2021-04-08T03:08:29Z-
dc.date.issued2008-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Refractive Surgery, 2008, v. 24, n. 9, p. 879-884-
dc.identifier.issn1081-597X-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/298466-
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: To assess the interobserver variability and agreement of anterior segment optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the measurement of LASIK flap thickness, and to compare the results with intraoperative ultrasound pachymetry measurements. METHODS: Thirty-nine eyes of 20 consecutive patients undergoing LASIK with the XP microkeratome (Bausch & Lomb) and ALLEGRETTO Eye-Q laser system (Wave-Light Inc) had corneal flap thickness measured with SP-100 ultrasound (Tomey Corp) intraoperatively and with OCT (Visante; Carl Zeiss Meditec Inc) postoperatively. Interobserver assessment was performed by comparing the flap thickness measurements obtained from the same scan by 2 masked, independent observers. Agreement of OCT scan was determined by assessment of 2 different scans of the same eye by the same observer. RESULTS: Mean (±standard deviation) flap thickness measured by ultrasound, OCT scan 1 (OCT 1-1) and scan 2 (OCT 1-2) assessed by observer 1, and OCT scan 1 (OCT 2-1) and scan 2 (OCT 2-2) assessed by observer 2 were 112.79±19.71, 124.69±17.02, 127.59±17.32, 130.59±20.34, and 133.74±19.70 μm, respectively. No statistically significant difference among the interobserver measurements was seen. The difference between OCT and ultrasound measurements by observers 1 and 2 was statistically significant (P<.01). Correlation among all measurements was statistically significant. Good agreement among the OCT scans was noted. CONCLUSIONS: Optical coherence tomography showed good correlation among measurements and observers for different OCT measurements in the assessment of corneal flap thickness after LASIK. However, OCT significantly overestimated flap thickness when compared to ultrasound despite a good correlation between these two modalities. Optical coherence tomography measurements should not be substituted for standad ultrasound measurements at the present time.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Refractive Surgery-
dc.titleMeasurement of LASIK flap thickness with anterior segment optical coherence tomography-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.3928/1081597x-20081101-05-
dc.identifier.pmid19044227-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-56249096888-
dc.identifier.volume24-
dc.identifier.issue9-
dc.identifier.spage879-
dc.identifier.epage884-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000260842500006-
dc.identifier.issnl1081-597X-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats