Glyxambi
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 3394
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page


 
   Table of Contents      
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 67  |  Issue : 9  |  Page : 1508

Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements using different imaging devices and ultrasound pachymetry


Sita Lakshmi Glaucoma Department, Anand Eye Institute, Hydearbad, Telangana, India

Date of Web Publication22-Aug-2019

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Tarannum Mansoori
Sita Lakshmi Glaucoma Department, Anand Eye Institute, Habsiguda, Hydearbad, Telangana
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_582_19

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Mansoori T. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements using different imaging devices and ultrasound pachymetry. Indian J Ophthalmol 2019;67:1508

How to cite this URL:
Mansoori T. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements using different imaging devices and ultrasound pachymetry. Indian J Ophthalmol [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Sep 21];67:1508. Available from: http://www.ijo.in/text.asp?2019/67/9/1508/265121



Sir,

I read with interest the article by Can et al.[1] on “Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements using different imaging devices and ultrasound pachymetry”.

In the methods section, it is mentioned that three consecutive central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements were taken with the non-contact devices. For the ultrasonic pachymetry (UP) measurement, the number of measurements performed was not mentioned. Was it a mean of three measurements or mean of nine measurements, as recommended by the manufacturer for this UP (PachPen; Accutome Inc, Malvern, PA)?

The authors have measured intra-session intra-operator repeatability for AL-scan measured CCT measurements. For the other three devices intra-observer repeatability for CCT measurements was not measured and they have mentioned that it has been evaluated before in other publications. However, the references for the same is not provided. Also, as the UP is being compared with the 3 non-contact devices and UP measurements are highly operator dependent, it would have been useful to obtain intra-operator, intra-session repeatability of CCT measurements for the UP.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Can E, Eser-Ozturk H, Duran M, Cetinkaya T, Arıturk N. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements using different imaging devices and ultrasound pachymetry. Indian J Ophthalmol 2019;67:496-9.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  




 

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

 
  In this article
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed214    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded58    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal