ABSTRACT
Purpose To compare 3 automated devices for measuring the horizontal corneal diameter [white-to-white (WTW) distance].
Setting Fundacion Oftalmologica Los Andes, Santiago, Chile.
Study Design Retrospective.
Methods In 65 eyes of 38 patients, the WTW distance was measured independently using Orbscan IIz tomography system (Bausch & Lomb), IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec) and OPD Scan III (NIDEK). We tested for systematic differences in measurements and estimated the limits of agreement (LoA) using linear mixed effects models.
Results The mean WTW distance was 11.8 ± 0.40 mm with Orbscan IIz, 12.1 ± 0.5 mm with IOLMaster 700 and 12.0 ± 0.4 mm with OPD Scan III. The mean difference between IOLMaster 700 and Orbscan IIz was 0.33 (95% CI 0.28;0.38) (p<0.001), between OPD Scan III and Orbscan IIz was 0.24 mm (95% CI 0.21;0.28) (p<0.001), and between IOL Master 700 and OPD Scan III was 0.09 (95% CI 0.05;0.12) (p<0.001). The 95% LoA for Orbscan IIz versus IOLMaster 700 was −0.69 mm to 0.03 mm, Orbscan IIz versus OPD Scan III was −0.52 mm to −0.03 mm, and OPD versus IOLMaster 700 was −0.39 mm to 0.22 mm. Switching to IOLMaster 700 or OPD Scan III measurements led to a selection of a longer phakic IOL length (Visian ICL, STAAR) in 34% and 33% of the cases, respectively compared to Orbscan IIz.
Conclusions The data suggests that these devices are not interchangeable for usual clinical practice. Adjustments based on mean differences was not enough to compensate for inter-instrument discrepancy in WTW measurements.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
N/A
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Study approved by Fundacion Oftalmologica los Andes Ethics Committee
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
What data in particular will be shared? Individual participant data that underlie the results reported in this article, after de-identification. What documents will be available? Study protocol, statistical analysis plan. When will data be available? Immediately after publication (no end date) With whom? Researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal For what the of analyses? Any purpose Proposals should be directed to Felipe Valenzuela, MD, Fundacion Oftalmologica los Andes.
