摘要
目的 Tomey超声测厚仪、Orbscan Ⅱ和Pentacam三种仪器测量屈光不正患者术前角膜中央厚度(CCT)进行比较,分析Orbscan Ⅱ、Pentacam同Tomey超声测厚仪比较的差异和一致性.方法 在准分子激光室选取术前检查的近视患者90例(90只眼均为左眼),对每位患者分别用Tomey超声测厚仪、Orbscan Ⅱ、和Pentacam三种仪器测量角膜中央厚度,对三组角膜中央厚度值进行分析比较,分别采用配对t检验评价两种仪器与超声测厚仪测量角膜中央厚度间的差异、简单线性相关描述两种仪器与超声测厚仪测量角膜中央厚度间的相关关系和Bland Altman分析来比较两种仪器与超声测厚仪测量角膜中央厚度间的一致性.结果 Tomey、Orbscan Ⅱ(声速系数0.95)和Pentacam三种仪器测量角膜中央厚度平均值分别为(543.1±30.2)μm、(542.1±36.1)μm、和(544.7±28.5)μm.Tomey和Orbscan Ⅱ两种测量仪器之间的比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).Tomey和Pentacam比较相差(-2.8±11.0)μm,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01),线性相关显示Tomey和Orbscan Ⅱ、Pentacam三种设备存在正相关(P<0.01).Bland Altman分析显示Tomey与Orbscan Ⅱ、Pentacam两种仪器间有较好的一致性,95%一致性界限分别为-37.4～+39.3 μm、-24.4～+18.8 μm.结论 两种方法与超声相比较相关性高、一致性好,都可以用来测量角膜厚度,存在一定的相互参考.
Objective To compare the measure of the corneal central thickness(CCT) of the faulty refraction patients by the three instruments.Tomey ultrasonic thickness meter,Orbscan Ⅱ and Pentacam.Analyse the differences and consistence of the three instruments. Methods Ninety eyes(all were left eyes)of the myopia patients during the pre-operation examination in the laser treatment, measure the CCT of every patient in the three different instruments, compare the central cornea thickness numbers by the three equipments.Take the pared t-test and evaluate the differences of the two instuments and describe the relationship between the two instuments and the ultrasonic thickness meter by simple linear regression. And analyse and compare the consistency of the two instuments and the ultrasonic thickness meter by Bland Altman. Results The average number of the CCT of the Tomey,Orbscan Ⅱ(sound velocityratio:0.96)and Pentacam were (543.1±30.2)μm,(542.1±36.1)μm and (544.7±28.5)μm. There was no statistical significance between Tomey and Orbscan Ⅱ(P>0.05). The difference between Tomey and Pentacam was (-2.8±11.0)μm(P<0.01). Simple linear regression reveals that the three instruments were positive correlation(P<0.01). Bland Altman revealed that Tomey and Orbscan Ⅱ,Pentacam had good consistency. 95% of the consisitency boundary were -37.4/+39.3 μm and -24.4/+18.8 μm. Conclusions The two methods compared with the ultrasound reveals high relation and good consistency which can both be used to measure the cornea thickness and can make a cross reference.
出处
《中国实用医刊》
2010年第16期5-7,共4页
Chinese Journal of Practical Medicine
