PLoS ONE (Jan 2013)

Comparison of anterior segment optical tomography parameters measured using a semi-automatic software to standard clinical instruments.

  • Marcus Ang,
  • Wesley Chong,
  • Huiqi Huang,
  • Wan Ting Tay,
  • Tien Yin Wong,
  • Ming-Guang He,
  • Tin Aung,
  • Jodhbir S Mehta

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065559
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 8, no. 6
p. e65559

Abstract

Read online

OBJECTIVE: To compare anterior segment parameters measured using a semi-automatic software (Zhongshan Angle Assessment Program, ZAP) applied to anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) images, with commonly used instruments. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of a total of 1069 subjects (1069 eyes) from three population-based studies of adults aged 40-80 years. All subjects underwent AS-OCT imaging and ZAP software was applied to determine anterior chamber depth (ACD), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior and keratometry (K) - readings. These were compared to auto-refraction, keratometry and ocular biometry measured using an IOLMaster, ultrasound pachymeter and auto-refractor respectively. Agreements between AS-OCT (ZAP) and clinical instrument modalities were described using Bland-Altman, 95% limits of agreement (LOA). RESULTS: The mean age of our subjects was 56.9±9.5 years and 50.9% were male. The mean AS-OCT (ZAP) parameters of our study cohort were: ACD 3.29±0.35 mm, CCT 560.75±35.07 µm; K-reading 46.79±2.72 D. There was good agreement between the measurements from ZAP analysis and each instrument and no violations in the assumptions of the LOA; albeit with a systematic bias for each comparison: AS-OCT consistently measured a deeper ACD compared to IOLMaster (95% LOA -0.24, 0.55); and a thicker CCT for the AS-OCT compared to ultrasound pachymetry (16.8±0.53 µm 95% LOA -17.3, 50.8). AS-OCT had good agreement with auto-refractor with at least 95% of the measurements within the prediction interval (P value <0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that there is good agreement between the measurements from the AS-OCT (ZAP) and conventional tools. However, small systematic biases remain that suggest that these measurement tools may not be interchanged.