Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31754826›Full record

ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2020

Reproducibility and reliability of central corneal thickness determination in more and less profound corneal edema using ultrasound pachymetry, a Scheimpflug camera and anterior segment OCT.

Kuerten David, Hossein-Zadeh Mandana, Plange Niklas, Walter Peter, Fuest Matthias

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements obtained by OrbscanIIzSaudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kuerten DavidDept. of Ophthalmology, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwels Str. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany. dkuerten@ukaachen.de.
Hossein-Zadeh MandanaDept. of Ophthalmology, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwels Str. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany.
Plange NiklasDept. of Ophthalmology, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwels Str. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany.
Walter PeterDept. of Ophthalmology, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwels Str. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany.
Fuest MatthiasDept. of Ophthalmology, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwels Str. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany.
RWTH Aachen University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study is to determine the influence of different degrees of corneal edema on the reliability and reproducibility of central corneal thickness(CCT) measurements by a Scheimpflug camera (Pentacam), anterior segment optical coherence tomography(AS-OCT) and ultrasound pachymetry(USP).

methodsForty-four patients undergoing ophthalmic surgery were included in this prospective study. All measurements were acquired by two investigators. The Pentacam and AS-OCT measurements were performed in randomized order followed by USP. Two measurements were taken by each investigator with each device. CCT was evaluated by using the apex value provided by the Pentacam, the corneal apex cut in the AS-OCT and averaging 2 cycles of 4 measurements for USP. Coefficients of variation (COV) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were determined. To investigate the reproducibility in different degrees of corneal edema, patients were subdivided into edema more/less than 10% of CCT, ≥/< 600 μm and > 650 μm CCT.

resultsNo significant differences were recorded for each individual investigator and measuring device. However, overall the devices differed significantly in the < 600 μm group (ANOVA p < 0.04). The reproducibility decreased with higher degrees of corneal edema in particular for investigator 1 and USP measurements. No significant overestimation of corneal thickness by the Pentacam was recorded in higher degrees of corneal edema.

conclusionUSP measurements are highly user dependent especially in higher degrees of corneal edema. Nevertheless, all methods were able to reach a high level of agreement in CCT measurement in higher degrees of corneal edema. Interestingly lower degrees of corneal edema revealed the only significant differences in-between the 3 devices.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overCorneaCorneal EdemaCorneal PachymetryFemaleHumansMaleObserver VariationOrgan SizePhotographyProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsTomography, Optical CoherenceAnterior segment diagnosticCorneal edemaPachymetry

Identifiers

PMID31754826
OpenAlexW2990107700

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.