Repeatability and agreement of biometric measurements using spectral domain anterior segment optical coherence tomography and Scheimpflug tomography in keratoconus

Comparison of a Scheimpflug Camera and Optical Coherence Tomography in Evaluating Keratoconic Eyes Post Keratoplasty

Background/Objective: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare corneal parameters and compliance using a Pentacam HR-Scheimpflug (Pentacam HR) and a swept-source OCT Casia (Casia) in keratoconus (KC) patients post penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) and KC patients without PKP, as well as a control group. Pachymetry measurements were also analyzed using a spectral domain OCT Solix (OCT Solix), Pentacam HR, and Casia. Methods: The study included 71 patients (136 keratoconic eyes; group A), 86 eyes with KC post-PKP (group B), 50 eyes with KC without PKP (group C), and 52 control participants (104 eyes). All participants were adults, Polish Caucasian, and met specific inclusion criteria. Patients with ophthalmological or systemic diseases, cognitive impairment, or pregnancy were excluded. Corneal parameters were measured using two devices (Casia and Pentacam HR), while pachymetry was assessed with three devices (Casia, Pentacam HR, and OCT Solix), with the inter-device agreement and group differences analyzed. Results: Significant differences (p < 0.05) were found across all groups. The post-PKP KC eyes showed significant differences in all front parameters and K2 and Astig. back, while the non-PKP KC eyes showed differences in the K1 back (p = 0.025). The controls displayed differences in all parameters except front astigmatism (p = 0.61). The Pentacam HR overestimated the thinnest corneal thickness (TCT) compared to the OCT Casia across groups. The inter-device agreement was excellent for the anterior parameters (ICC > 0.9) but good for the posterior parameters and TCT. Conclusions: This study highlights significant variability in corneal and pachymetry measurements across devices, with OCT Casia providing more consistent and clinically reliable results than Pentacam HR. Clinicians should exercise caution when using these devices interchangeably, particularly for posterior parameters and TCT.

Correction: Repeatability and agreement of biometric measurements using spectral domain anterior segment optical coherence tomography and Scheimpflug tomography in keratoconus

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248659.].

Repeatability and agreement of two ocular biometers with single and dual Scheimpflug cameras in keratoconus eyes

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the repeatability and agreement of two different ocular biometers and Scheimpflug devices in keratoconus eyes.

METHODS

This prospective, comparative trial took place at the University hospital, Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. We included eyes with keratoconus, one eye per patient, randomly selected. Measurements were taken with Galilei G6 (Ziemer, Switzerland) and Pentacam AXL (Oculus, Germany), three consecutive measurements each. Repeatability and agreement were evaluated for simulated keratometry (simK), astigmatism (simA), maximum keratometry (KMax) and its axis, total keratometry (TCP), axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD), and thinnest pachymetry (TCT).

RESULTS

Both devices showed an excellent repeatability with intra class correlation (ICC) of > 0.97 for all parameters. The 95% limits of repeatability (LoR95%) and agreement (LoA95%) were narrow for all parameters. The Galilei G6 had a narrower LoAR95% for TCT (2.1 μm vs. 4.6 μm), but a wider LoR95% for KMax (0.52D vs. 1.18D). No relevant difference was found for the other parameters. Agreement between the devices was good to moderate, especially for simK and TCP.

CONCLUSIONS

Both devices show excellent repeatability with narrow LoR95% and high ICC for all parameters. The only relevant difference was found for KMax and TCT in favor of Pentacam AXL and Galilei G6, respectively. Agreement was good to moderate, and most parameters should not be considered interchangeable.

Comparing Repeatability and Agreement between Commonly Used Corneal Imaging Devices in Keratoconus

SIGNIFICANCE

Keratometry and pachymetry are important for diagnosis and monitoring of keratoconus. Many corneal imaging units exist, but comparison to determine repeatability and agreement is paramount for adequate keratoconus management in primary and secondary care.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the repeatability and agreement of a Placido disc-based videokeratoscope (Melbourne, Victoria, Australia) used in primary care with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Optopol Technology, Zawiercie, Poland) and Scheimpflug corneal tomography (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) in secondary care.

METHODS

This was a prospective single-center study where one eye was randomized to have central corneal thickness;thinnest corneal thickness (TCT); and maximum, mean, steep, and flat keratometry (Kmax, Kmean, Ksteep, and Kflat, respectively), measured with all three devices. Three measurements were completed per device to assess intraobserver repeatability.

RESULTS

A total of 110 eyes from 110 patients with keratoconus were analyzed. Repeatability was best with the Pentacam for central corneal thickness, Kmax, Kmean, Ksteep, and Kflat parameters (precision, 9.21, 0.8, 0.38, 0.52, and 0.58). The Medmont had better repeatability than the Revo with Kmax, Kmean, Ksteep, and Kflat (precision, 1.41,1.35,1.43, and 1.59). Revo had the best repeatability with TCT (precision, 3.81). The intraclass correlation coefficient was >0.94 for all parameters in all devices. Agreement was generally poor between devices. However, there was good agreement between Pentacam and Medmont Kflat measurements ( P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Repeatability of keratometry parameters with the Pentacam and Medmont was greater than the Revo, suggesting a lower threshold for detecting change in anterior corneal parameters. The Revo had the greatest repeatability for TCT, suggesting a lower threshold for detecting thinning in disease progression and corneal-crosslinking safety. There was poor agreement between devices, and it is not recommended for them to be used interchangably.

Repeatability of Scheimpflug based corneal tomography parameters in advanced keratoconus with thin corneas

OBJECTIVE

To determine the repeatability limits of corneal tomography parameters in patients with advanced and moderately thin keratoconic corneas to assist in planning thickness-based procedural interventions.

METHODS

Prospective, single-centre, repeatability study. Three tomography scans using the Pentacam AXL were obtained from patients with keratoconus with thinnest corneal thickness (TCT) ≦400 µm (sub-400 group) and compared to those with TCT = 450-500 µm (450-plus group). Eyes with previous crosslinking, intraocular surgery, or acute corneal hydrops were excluded. Eyes were age and gender-matched. The within-subject standard deviations for flat keratometry (K1), steep keratometry (K2), maximal keratometry (Kmax), astigmatism and TCT were used to calculate respective repeatability limits (r). Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were also analysed.

RESULTS

The sub-400 group comprised 114 eyes from 114 participants, and the 450-plus group comprised 114 eyes from 114 participants. In the sub-400 group, TCT was amongst the least repeatable parameters (33.92 µm; ICC 0.96), compared with the 450-plus group (14.32 µm; ICC 0.99, p < 0.01). In the sub-400 group, K1 and K2 of the anterior surface were the most repeatable parameters (r 3.79 and 3.22 respectively; ICC 0.97 and 0.98 respectively) compared with the 450-plus group (r 1.17 and 0.92 respectively; and ICC 0.98 and 0.99 respectively, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The repeatability of corneal tomography measurements is significantly reduced in sub-400 keratoconic corneas when compared to 450-plus corneas. Repeatability limits should be carefully considered when surgical interventions are planned for such patients.

Comparison of corneal measurements in normal and keratoconus eyes using Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography (AS-OCT) and Pentacam HR topographer

BACKGROUND

Keratoconus (KC) is easily recognized by its unique topographic pattern, but it can be difficult to distinguish subclinical form of the disease from the normal cornea. Optovue anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) helps diagnose KC.

AIM OF THE WORK

To assess and the level of agreement of Keratometry-readings (K), Central Corneal Thickness (CCT) and Thinnest Corneal Thickness (TCT) measurements obtained by Optovue AS-OCT and Wavelight Oculyzer Pentacam HR in two groups: KC eyes and normal eyes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a prospective clinical observational study. The study included 110 eyes divided into two groups. The study group included 62 eyes with topographic evidence of KC. The control group included 48 eyes of normal subjects with no topographic evidence of KC. All of the participants underwent full cycloplegic refraction, spectacle best-corrected distance visual acuity, comprehensive slit-lamp biomicroscopy and fundoscopy. All participants underwent corneal topography by Pentacam HR and AS-OCT.

RESULTS

There were highly significant differences between the studied groups as regarding BCVA, intraocular pressure and CCT measurements which were found to be lower among KC group compared to the control one. There were highly significant differences between the studied groups regarding TCT measurement detected by Pentacam HR and AS-OCT which was found to be lower among the keratoconus group compared to the control one (470.9, 455.7 versus 541.9 and 518.7 respectively).

CONCLUSION

Both Scheimpflug-based imaging and AS-OCT provide comparable readings with a good agreement regarding corneal pachymetry in keratoconus group with accurate identification of KC eyes and healthy ones. However, there was a significant difference in K readings between both devices in Keratoconus and control group.

Corneal thickness measurements with the RTVue, Casia-2, and Pentacam devices in patients with mild-to-moderate keratoconus: a comparative study

BACKGROUND

To compare the characteristics of corneal thickness measurements among the RTVue, Casia-2, and Pentacam in patients with mild-to-moderate keratoconus.

METHODS

We recruited 46 eyes of 46 patients diagnosed with mild-to-moderate keratoconus at our hospital between January and March 2022. The central corneal thickness (CCT) and thinnest corneal thickness (TCT) were measured using two optical coherence tomography (OCT) instruments (RTVue and Casia-2) and the more conventional Pentacam. Differences and correlations between the CCTs and TCTs, based on the device and influencing factors, were explored.

RESULTS

The CCTs were highly consistent among the groups (p = 0.434) and correlated with one another (p < 0.001). The TCTs measured by OCTs were thinner than those measured by the Pentacam (p < 0.001); however, all three devices were highly correlated (p < 0.001). The thinnest point location measurements with RTVue and Casia-2 differed significantly from the measurements with the Pentacam. Bland-Altman plots demonstrated a significant agreement between Pentacam and OCTs in TCT measurement (p < 0.001); the 95% limits of agreement were - 3.1 μm to + 33.1 μm for Pentacam and RTVue and - 8.6 μm to + 36.5 μm for Pentacam and Casia-2. RTVue and Casia-2 showed no difference in corneal thickness (p = 0.633) and thinnest point location measurement (p > 0.05). Multivariate analysis identified that the TCT measurement difference between the RTVue and Pentacam was related to the difference between the CCT and TCT (b = 0.490, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.033 to 0.948, p = 0.036), whereas the difference between the Casia-2 and Pentacam was related to the anterior radius for curvature (A) grade (b = 3.9, 95% CI: 1.753 to 6.074, p = 0.001), corneal pachymetry at the thinnest (C) grade (b = - 7.875, 95% CI: - 11.404 to - 4.346, p < 0.001), and the difference between the CCT and TCT (b = 0.425, 95% CI: 0.1 to 0.751, p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

CCTs in patients with mild-to-moderate keratoconus were similar among all three devices, but the TCTs and the thinnest point locations were not. Furthermore, the TCT measurement differences between the OCT devices and the Pentacam were more pronounced in keratoconus cases with a steeper anterior surface, thicker TCTs, and a larger difference between the CCT and TCT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Number: 2021118-1. Retrospectively registered: September 01, 2021.