↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Comparison of central corneal thickness: ultrasound pachymetry versus slit-lamp optical coherence tomography, specular microscopy, and Orbscan

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of central corneal thickness: ultrasound pachymetry versus slit-lamp optical coherence tomography, specular microscopy, and Orbscan
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, June 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s81376
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wassia A Khaja, Sandeep Grover, Amy T Kelmenson, Lee R Ferguson, Kumar Sambhav, Kakarla V Chalam

Abstract

Central corneal thickness (CCT) can be measured by using contact and non-contact methods. Ultrasound pachymetry (US pachymetry) is a contact method for measuring CCT and is perhaps the most commonly used method. However, non-contact methods like scanning slit topography (Orbscan II), slit-lamp optical coherence tomography (SL-OCT), and specular microscopy are also used. Not many studies have correlated the measurement of CCT with all four modalities. The purpose of this study was to compare and correlate the CCT measurements obtained by US pachymetry with SL-OCT, specular microscopy, and Orbscan. This is a prospective, comparative study done in an institutional setting. Thirty-two eyes of 32 subjects with no known ocular disease and best-corrected visual acuity of 20/20 were enrolled. CCT measurements were obtained using SL-OCT, specular microscopy, scanning slit topography (Orbscan), and US pachymetry. Three measurements were made with each instrument by the same operator. Mean, standard deviation, and coefficient of variation were calculated for CCT measurements acquired by the four measurement devices. Bland-Altman plot was constructed to determine the agreements between the CCT measurements obtained by different equipment. The mean CCT was 548.16±48.68 μm by US pachymetry. In comparison, CCT averaged 546.36±44.17 μm by SL-OCT, 557.61±49.92 μm by specular microscopy, and 551.03±48.96 μm by Orbscan for all subjects. Measurements by the various modalities were strongly correlated. Correlations (r (2)) of CCT, as measured by US pachymetry compared with other modalities, were: SL-OCT (r (2)=0.98, P<0.0001), specular microscopy (r (2)=0.98, P<0.0001), and Orbscan (r (2)=0.96, P<0.0001). All modalities had a linear correlation with US pachymetry measurements. In subjects with healthy corneas, SL-OCT, specular microscopy, and Orbscan (with correction factor) can be used interchangeably with US pachymetry in certain clinical settings. The four modalities showed significant linear correlations with one another.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Researcher 6 11%
Other 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 17 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 11%
Engineering 3 5%
Computer Science 1 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 17 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 June 2015.
All research outputs
#20,653,708
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,605
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,502
of 281,399 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#60
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,399 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.