上海交通大学学报（医学版）

上海交通大学学报（医学版）

• 论著（临床研究） • 上一篇    下一篇

Lenstar LS900与Tomey EM-3000对角膜中央厚度测量结果的比较

张 琼1，张士胜2，吴彦霖1，杜 炜1，王 玲1，徐建敏1   

  1. 1.上海交通大学 医学院附属瑞金医院眼科, 上海 200025； 2.上海瑞视眼科, 上海 200011
  • 出版日期:2013-09-28 发布日期:2013-09-29
  • 通讯作者: 徐建敏, 电子信箱: xujianmin0919@sina.com。
  • 作者简介:张 琼(1972—)， 女， 副主任医师， 博士; 电子信箱: joan_ss2004@sina.cn; 张士胜(1973—)， 男， 副主任医师， 博士; 电子信箱: sszhang@rjeye.com。

Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with Lenstar LS900 and Tomey EM-3000

ZHANG Qiong1, ZHANG Shi-sheng2, WU Yan-lin1, DU Wei1, WANG Ling1, XU Jian-min1   

  1. 1.Department of Ophthalmology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200025, China; 2.New Vision Eye Clinic, Shanghai 200011, China
  • Online:2013-09-28 Published:2013-09-29

PDF (PC)

1212

摘要：

目的 比较Lenstar LS900与Tomey EM-3000测量角膜中央厚度的精确性和一致性。方法 白内障术前患者共172例（188眼），将患者按照眼轴长度分为4组：A组（轴长≥28 mm）、B组（26 mm≤轴长＜28 mm）、C组（24 mm≤轴长＜26 mm）和D组（轴长＜24 mm）。分别采用Lenstar LS900和Tomey EM-3000眼前节分析系统测量角膜中央厚度，并对所得数据进行统计学分析。结果 Lenstar LS900测量的角膜中央厚度的平均值为（541.51±36.41） μm，Tomey EM-3000测量的角膜中央厚度的平均值为（536.28±37.64） μm，两者差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）；在4组中除D组外，其余三组两者角膜厚度差异都有统计学意义（P<0.01）；两方法测量角膜厚度值间存在线性相关（r=0.96，P<0.01）；测量差值95%一致性界限范围为（－13.9 μm，24.2 μm），其中95.7%（180/188）的点在一致性界限内。结论 Lenstar LS900测量角膜厚度值稍大于Tomey EM-3000，但两者存在正相关，具有一致性，均可用于角膜厚度的测量。但在某些特殊的情况下，不能完全互换。

关键词: 角膜中央厚度, Lenstar LS900, Tomey EM-3000

Abstract:

Objective To compare the accuracy and consistency between Lenstar LS900 and Tomey EM-3000 in measurement of central corneal thickness. Methods One hundred and seventy-two patients (188 eyes) with cataract were divided into four groups based on the axial length: group A (≥28 mm), group B (26 mm to 28 mm), group C (24 mm to 26 mm) and group D (＜24 mm). Central corneal thickness was measured by Lenstar LS900 and Tomey EM-3000 analyzer respectively, and the data were statistically analyzed. Results The mean central corneal thickness measured by Lenstar LS900 was (541.51±36.41) μm, that measured by Tomey EM3000 was (536.28±37.64) μm, and there were significant differences between them (P<0.01). Except for group D, there were significant differences between central corneal thickness measured by two methods in the other three groups (P<0.01). There was linear correlation between central corneal thickness measured by two methods (r=0.96, P<0.01). The 95% limits of agreement ranged between -13.9 μm and 24.2 μm, and 95.7% (180/188) fell in the limits. Conclusion The central corneal thickness measured by Lenstar LS900 is slightly larger than that measured by Tomey EM-3000, while there exists high correlation and good agreement between them, and both can be used in measurement of central corneal thickness. However, the measurements should be carefully evaluated in patients whose intraocular pressure must strictly be monitored.

Key words: central corneal thickness, Lenstar LS900, Tomey EM-3000