Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 8869
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page

   Table of Contents      
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 66  |  Issue : 8  |  Page : 1228-1229

Comparison of central corneal thickness measurement with Sirius Topographer and Nidek Axial Length Scan


Sita Lakshmi Glaucoma Center, Anand Eye Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana, India

Date of Web Publication23-Jul-2018

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Tarannum Mansoori
7-147/1, Anand Eye Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_431_18

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Mansoori T. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurement with Sirius Topographer and Nidek Axial Length Scan. Indian J Ophthalmol 2018;66:1228-9

How to cite this URL:
Mansoori T. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurement with Sirius Topographer and Nidek Axial Length Scan. Indian J Ophthalmol [serial online] 2018 [cited 2020 May 26];66:1228-9. Available from: http://www.ijo.in/text.asp?2018/66/8/1228/237336



Sir,

I read with interest the article by Duman et al.[1] on “Comparison of anterior segment measurements using Sirius Topographer ® and Nidek Axial Length-Scan ® (AL-scan) with assessing repeatability in patients with cataract” (mean age, 71.79 ± 7.91 years). We would like to mention a few points in relation to central corneal thickness (CCT) measurement in their study.

The study reports mean CCT of 523.46 ± 40.58 μm with AL-scan and 545.32 ± 41.38 μm with Sirius Topographer in 43 eyes, for the first measurement. Using the same devices, we found lower mean CCT with AL-scan and Sirius Topographer, which was 507.43 ± 33.54 and 512.08 ± 33.1 μm, respectively, in 127 healthy eyes (mean age, 35.91 + 7.7 years).[2] The present study [1] found a mean difference of 19.759 for CCT measurement and poor agreement with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) to be 17.220–22.299 (P = 0.00) between the 2 devices. Our study reported a mean difference of − 4.6 μm for CCT and high level of agreement (95% LoA: -12.2 to 2.9, P = 0.26) between the 2 devices.

One of the reasons for the significant mean difference in CCT between the 2 devices in the present study could be because of the fact that the measurements were taken between 10 am and 5 pm which could have affected the diurnal variation in CCT, when compared with our study where the CCT measurements were obtained between 3 pm and 5 pm. Furthermore, the difference in mean CCT between the 2 studies could be because of the difference in age, sample size, and ethnicity [3] of the population studied.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Duman R, Çetinkaya E, Duman R, Dogan M, Sabaner MC. Comparison of anterior segment measurements using sirius topographer® and nidek axial length-scan® with assessing repeatability in patients with cataracts. Indian J Ophthalmol 2018;66:402-6.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
2.
Mansoori T, Balakrishna N. Repeatability and agreement of central corneal thickness measurement with non-contact methods: A comparative study. Int Ophthalmol 2017; doi: 10.1007/s10792-017-0543-1. [Epub ahead of print].  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Shimmyo M, Ross AJ, Moy A, Mostafavi R. Intraocular pressure, goldmann applanation tension, corneal thickness, and corneal curvature in Caucasians, Asians, hispanics, and African Americans. Am J Ophthalmol 2003;136:603-13.  Back to cited text no. 3
    




 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed573    
    Printed1    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded125    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal