摘要
目的比较前节OCT、Pentacam和A超测量中央角膜厚度（CCT）的差异。方法选择近视患者102例（204眼），行角膜屈光手术前分别用前节OCT（AS-OCT）、Pentacam和A超测量CCT，并进行统计分析。结果前节OCT和Pentacam测量CCT的重复性高于A超；三者测得的CCT分别为（532±30）μm、（539±31）μm和（537±29）μm；三者测量CCT均具有显著相关性（P〈0．05）；三者的回归方程分别为CCTPenta—cam=0．934CCT前节OCT＋39．789、CCTPentacam=0．875CCTA超＋70．194和CCT前节OCT=0．913CCTA超＋40．962。前节OCT测量角膜厚度的结果小于Pentacam与A超（P〈0．05）。结论前节OCT、Penta—cam和A超在测量角膜厚度方面各有优势，不能简单替代。
Objective To compare the difference of central corneal thickness （CCT） measured by anterior segment optical coherence tomography（AS-OCT） , Pentacam and A-mode ultrasound. Meth- ods AS-OCT, Pentaeam and A-mode ultrasound were used to measure the CCT on 102 myopic cases （204 eyes） undergoing laser in situ keratomileusis （LASIK）, and then compared the results. Results AS-OCT and Pentacam had better repeatability in measurement of CCT than A-mode ultrasound. The val- ue of CCT measured by AS-OCT, Pentacam and A-mode ultrasound were （ 532 ± 30 ） μm, （ 539± 31 ）p,m and （537 ± 29）μm. There was a significant linear correlation in CCT measured by three meas- urements （P 〈 0.05 ）. The regression equation of three measurements were CCT Pentacam = 0.934 CCT AS-OCT ＋39. 789, CCT Pentacam = 0. 875 CCT A-mode ＋ 70. 194 and CCT AS-OCT = 0.913 CCT A- mode ＋ 40. 962. The CCT measured by AS-OCT was obvious lower than that measured by Pentacam and A-mode ultrasound, there were statistical differences （ P 〈 0. 05 ）. Conclusions AS-OCT, Pentacam and A-mode ultrasound have different advantage of three measurements on clinical using, these instru- ments should not be used interchangeablv for CCT measurement.
出处
《中国实用医刊》
2013年第4期7-9,共3页
Chinese Journal of Practical Medicine
关键词
中央角膜厚度
前节OCT
PENTACAM
A超
Central corneal thickness
Anterior segment optical coherence tomography
Penta-cam
A-mode ultrasound
