ArticleFrontiers in ophthalmology2025
A prospective comparison of Scheimpflug-based anterior segment imaging systems in normal and abnormal corneas: Oculus Pentacam vs. Remidio Visionix VX650.
Article in Frontiers in ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Agreement between Pentacam HR and Visionix VX650 system for corneal and anterior chamber parameters.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Advancements in anterior segment imaging have significantly improved the precision of corneal diagnostics, aiding ocular conditions management. The study evaluated the agreement between two Scheimpflug devices-Pentacam and Remidio Visionix 650 (VX650)-in assessing corneal and anterior chamber parameters in patients with and without corneal abnormalities. Materials and methods: This prospective study at a tertiary eye care hospital measured pachymetry values (central corneal thickness, thinnest point), front corneal surface parameters (keratometry, curvature, astigmatism), back corneal surface parameters (elevation, curvature) and anterior chamber parameters (depth, volume, angle). Bland-Altman analysis assessed agreement between the devices, and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) evaluated VX650's repeatability. Results: Of the 202 patients (mean age was 25 ± 4.33 years), 141 eyes were classified as normal and 61 as abnormal (41 keratoconus, 17 post-LASIK, 3 post-ICL). Bland-Altman analysis showed good agreement between Pentacam and VX650 for anterior segment parameters. The VX650 measured marginally thicker corneal thickness (mean difference of central corneal thickness (CCT) of -4.0 ± 6.3 µm). Statistically significant differences in apical corneal thickness were noted for post-refractive surgery patients. K1 and K2 values showed significant variations in keratoconus but were not clinically significant. Anterior chamber depth was similar between devices, though volume differences were observed post-surgery. ICC indicated good to excellent repeatability (above 0.75) for most parameters. Conclusion: Remidio Visionix VX650 showed good agreement with Pentacam for key anterior segment measurements, confirming its reliability for corneal diagnostics. Additionally, its multifunctional capabilities offer potential for streamlining workflows, especially in clinics seeking efficient, comprehensive eye assessments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.