The comparative study of two recently developed A-scan devices: Determination of central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth and axial length

6Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Purpose: The clinical use and comparison of two recently developed A-scan ultrasound devices. Methods: The same investigator determined central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD) and axial length (AL) with an OcuScan RxP (Alcon, Forth Worth, Texas, USA) and an AL-2000 (Tomey, Erlangen, Germany) ultrasound device in 80 eyes of 40 patients. The mean patient age was 63.72years [standard deviation (SD) 18.92]. The patients did not suffer from any systemic or eye disease affecting the anterior and posterior segments of the eye, and their refractive error (spherical and astigmatic) did not exceed ± 3.0 dioptres. Results: The value of the CCT was 541.55 (SD 34.97) μm with the OcuScan RxP, and 547.46 (SD 35.70) μm with the AL-2000 device (P < 0.001). With respect to the ACD and AL, significantly lower values were obtained with the AL-2000 instrument (P < 0.001). The ACD was 2.92 (SD 0.48) mm with the AL-2000 and 3.07 (SD 0.47) mm with the OcuScan RxP device. The AL was 22.67 (SD 0.84) mm with the AL-2000 and 22.81 (SD 0.87) mm with the OcuScan RxP instrument. However, a positive and significant correlation could be demonstrated between the devices (r = 0.88 CCT, r = 0.86 ACD and r = 0.91 AL; P < 0.001). Conclusion: The instruments are reliable in clinical use; however, statistically significant differences were found between the devices. During patient follow-up, the devices cannot simply be used interchangeably. © 2007 The Authors Journal Compilation 2007 Acta Ophthalmol Scand.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sohajda, Z., Papp, J., Berta, A., & Módis, L. (2008). The comparative study of two recently developed A-scan devices: Determination of central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth and axial length. Acta Ophthalmologica, 86(1), 45–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0420.2007.00994.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free