IOL master 700和Lenstar测量眼轴的结果比较

曲勃; 刘丹霞; 张旺; 秦宇; 黄婷; 陆璐

doi:10.7619/jcmp.201912006

IOL master 700和Lenstar测量眼轴的结果比较

曲勃¹,
刘丹霞¹,
张旺¹,
秦宇¹,
黄婷^{1, 2},
陆璐^1, ,

1.
中国医科大学附属第四医院中国医科大学眼科医院辽宁省晶状体重点实验室, 辽宁沈阳, 110001
2.
重庆爱尔麦格眼科医院, 重庆, 400060

基金项目:

辽宁省自然科学基金 2014021005

辽宁省自然科学基金 201602851

详细信息

通讯作者:
陆璐, E-mail: dolphinemu@foxmail.com

中图分类号: R771
计量
- 文章访问数: 443
- HTML全文浏览量: 234
- PDF下载量: 26
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2019-03-20
- 录用日期: 2019-04-22
- 网络出版日期: 2021-02-22
- 发布日期: 2019-06-27

Comparison of IOL master 700 and Lenstar for measurement of axial lengths

QU Bo¹,
LIU Danxia¹,
ZHANG Wang¹,
QIN Yu¹,
HUANG Ting^{1, 2},
LU Lu^1, ,

1.
The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Ophthalmology Hospital of China Medical University, Key Laboratory for Crystalline Lens of Liaoning Province, Shenyang, Liaoning, 110001
2.
Chongqing Aier Eye Hospital, Chongqing, 400060

摘要

摘要:
目的比较IOL master 700和Lenstar测量眼轴(AL)的差异性、相关性和一致性。
方法采用横断面研究纳入2018年5—7月于中国医科大学附属第四医院、中国医科大学眼科医院就诊的患者94例(94眼), 每位患者先后行Lenstar、IOL master 700测量AL。观察2种测量方法的差异性、相关性和一致性。
结果 Lenstar及IOL master 700在AL的检测中无显著差异性(P>0.05), 但具有高度相关性和良好一致性。
结论 IOL master 700、Lenstar的眼轴测量结果有良好一致性和高度相关性，可以相互替代。
- 眼轴 /
- IOL master 700 /
- Lenstar /
- 青光眼
Abstract:
Objective To compare the differences, correlation, and consistency of results in measurement of axial lengths(AL) by Lenstar and IOL master 700.
Methods In this cross-sectional study, a total of 94 patients(94 eyes) between May and July 2018 from Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University and Ophthalmology Hospital of China Medical University were selected as research objects, and each patient performed Lenstar, IOL master 700 in sequence to measure the AL. The difference, correlation, and consistency of the two instruments were compared. They are random analysis of variance, Pearson correlative analysis, and Bland-Altman analysis respectively.
Results Lenstar and IOL master 700 had no statistically significance in the differences in AL measurement(P>0.05), but has a higher correlation and good consistency.
Conclusion The two methods have higher correlation and consistency in the AL measurements, and can be interchangeable.
- axial lengths /
- IOL master 700 /
- Lenstar /
- glaucoma

HTML全文

图 1 Lenstar与IOL master 700测量AL结果的相关性

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 Lenstar与IOL master 700测量AL结果的一致性Bland-Altman图

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

参考文献(15)

[1]	Foster P J, Buhrmann R, Quigley H A, et al. The definition and classification of glaucoma in prevalence surveys[J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 2002, 86(2): 238-242. doi: 10.1136/bjo.86.2.238
[2]	Thomas R, George R, Parikh R, et al. Five year risk of progression of primary angle closure suspects to primary angle closure: a population based study[J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 2003, 87(4): 450-454. doi: 10.1136/bjo.87.4.450
[3]	Thomas R, Parikh R, Muliyil J, et al. Five-year risk of progression of primary angle closure to primary angle closure glaucoma: a population-based study[J]. Acta Ophthalmol Scand, 2003, 81(5): 480-485. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0420.2003.00135.x
[4]	Wang L H, Huang W Y, Huang S S, et al. Ten-year incidence of primary angle closure in elderly Chinese: the Liwan Eye Study[J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 2019, 103(3): 355-360. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-311808
[5]	严良, 李雯. 闭角型青光眼房角关闭机制研究现状[J]. 中国实用眼科杂志, 2013, 31(6): 653-656. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1006-4443.2013.06.001
[6]	Lowe R F. Aetiology of the anatomical basis for primary angle-closure glaucoma. Biometrical comparisons between normal eyes and eyes with primary angle-closure glaucoma[J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 1970, 54(3): 161-169. doi: 10.1136/bjo.54.3.161
[7]	Markowitz S N, Donald Morin J. The ratio of lens thickness to axial length for biometric standardization in angle-closure glaucoma[J]. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 1985, 99(4): 400-402. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(85)90005-4
[8]	Shammas H J, Hoffer K J. Repeatability and reproducibility of biometry and keratometry measurements using a noncontact optical low-coherence reflectometer and keratometer[J]. Am J Ophthalmol, 2012, 153(1): 55-61. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2011.06.012
[9]	Koktekir B E, Gedik S, Bakbak B. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with optical low-coherence reflectometry and ultrasound pachymetry and reproducibility of both devices[J]. Cornea, 2012, 31(11): 1278-1281. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e31823f7701
[10]	Buckhurst J, Wolffsohn S, Shah S, et al. A new optical low coherence reflectometry device for ocular biometry in cataract patients[J]. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 2009, 93(7): 949-953. http://bjo.bmj.com/content/93/7/949.abstract
[11]	Chen Y A, Hirnschall N, Findl O. Evaluation of 2 new optical biometry devices and comparison with the current gold standard biometer[J]. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2011, 37(3): 513-517. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.10.041
[12]	Akman A, Asena L, Güngör S G. Evaluation and comparison of the new swept source OCT-based IOLMaster 700 with the IOLMaster 500[J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 2016, 100(9): 1201-1205. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307779
[13]	Kurian M, Negalur N, Das S, et al. Biometry with a new swept-source optical coherence tomography biometer: Repeatability and agreement with an optical low-coherence reflectometry device[J]. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2016, 42(4): 577-581. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.01.038
[14]	Srivannaboon S, Chirapapaisan C, Chonpimai P, Loket S. Clinical comparison of a new swept-source optical coherence tomography-based optical biometer and a time-domain optical coherence tomography-based optical biometer[J]. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2015, 41(10): 2224-2232. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0886335015011153
[15]	Azuara-Blanco A, Burr J, Ramsay C, et al. Effectiveness of early lens extraction for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma (EAGLE): a randomised controlled trial[J]. Lancet, 2016, 388(10052): 1389-1397.