2008PubMedOpen access

Central Corneal Thickness Measurement by Ultrasound versus Orbscan II.

Amir Faramarzi, Hossein Ziai

Open full text 11 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare Orbscan II and ultrasonic pachymetry for measurement of central corneal thickness (CCT) in eyes scheduled for keratorefractive surgery. METHODS: CCT was measured using Orbscan II (Bausch & Lomb, USA) and then by ultrasonic pachymetry (Tomey SP-3000, Tomey Ltd, Japan) in 100 eyes of 100 patients with no history of ocular surgery scheduled for excimer laser refractive surgery. RESULTS: Mean CCT was 544.7±35.5 (range 453-637) μm by ultrasonic pachymetry versus 546.9±41.6 (range 435-648) μm measured by Orbscan II applying an acoustic factor of 0.92 (P=0.14). The standard deviation of measurements was greater with Orbscan pachymetry but the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: CCT measurements by Orbscan II (applying an acoustic factor) and by ultrasonic pachymetry are not significantly different; however, when CCT readings by Orbscan II are in the lower range, it is advisable to recheck the measurements using ultrasonic pachymetry.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

PURPOSE: To compare Orbscan II and ultrasonic pachymetry for measurement of central corneal thickness (CCT) in eyes scheduled for keratorefractive surgery. METHODS: CCT was measured using Orbscan II (Bausch & Lomb, USA) and then by ultrasonic pachymetry (Tomey SP-3000, Tomey Ltd, Japan) in 100 eyes of 100 patients with no history of ocular surgery scheduled for excimer laser refractive surgery. RESULTS: Mean CCT was 544.7±35.5 (range 453-637) μm by ultrasonic pachymetry versus 546.9±41.6 (range 435-648) μm measured by Orbscan II applying an acoustic factor of 0.92 (P=0.14). The standard deviation of measurements was greater with Orbscan pachymetry but the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: CCT measurements by Orbscan II (applying an acoustic factor) and by ultrasonic pachymetry are not significantly different; however, when CCT readings by Orbscan II are in the lower range, it is advisable to recheck the measurements using ultrasonic pachymetry.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 11 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

PURPOSE: To compare Orbscan II and ultrasonic pachymetry for measurement of central corneal thickness (CCT) in eyes scheduled for keratorefractive surgery. METHODS: CCT was measured using Orbscan II (Bausch & Lomb, USA) and then by ultrasonic pachymetry (Tomey SP-3000, Tomey Ltd, Japan) in 100 eyes of 100 patients with no history of ocular surgery scheduled for excimer laser refractive surgery. RESULTS: Mean CCT was 544.7±35.5 (range 453-637) μm by ultrasonic pachymetry versus 546.9±41.6 (range 435-648) μm measured by Orbscan II applying an acoustic factor of 0.92 (P=0.14). The standard deviation of measurements was greater with Orbscan pachymetry but the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: CCT measurements by Orbscan II (applying an acoustic factor) and by ultrasonic pachymetry are not significantly different; however, when CCT readings by Orbscan II are in the lower range, it is advisable to recheck the measurements using ultrasonic pachymetry.

Key concepts: Medicine, Ophthalmology, Optometry, Ultrasound, Radiology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Central Corneal Thickness Measurement by Ultrasound versus Orbscan II. — Research Paper | ScholarLens