Sirius系统与Lenstar 900测量眼前节参数的比较研究

Comparison of anterior segment parameters with Lenstar 900 and Sirius system

目的：比较两种非接触眼生物测量仪Lenstar 900（ LS900）和Sirius眼前节分析系统测量眼前节有关参数的异同。 方法：对近视患者54例87眼分别采用LS900及Sirius系统测量角膜中央厚度（ central corneal thickness, CCT）、前房深度（aqueous depth, ACD）、角膜平K（flat keratometry, FK）、角膜陡 K（steep keratometry,SK）、白到白（white to white, WTW）。采用配对 t 检验、Pearson 相关和 Bland-Altman图分析和评估。 结果：Sirius系统检测的CCT和ACD大于LS900,而FK、SK和 WTW 小于 LS900,差值的均值分别为-6.11±6.32μm；-0.09±0.07 mm；0.18±0.25 D；0.21±0.36 D 和0.25±0.39mm,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.01）。 Pearson相关性分析两种检测结果均显著相关（ P〈0.01）。 Bland-Altman 一致性比较：95%一致性界限分别为6.26~18.49μm,0.04~0.22mm,0.68~0.32D,0.92~0.50D和1.00~0.5mm。 结论：LS900和Sirius系统对眼前节参数的检测具有良好的相关性和一致性,但也存在一定差异。这可能与Lenstar和Sirius测量方式并不一致有关,因此还有待进一步研究。

AIM： To compare the anterior segment measurements derived from optical low coherence reflectometer （ Lenstar LS900 ） and combined Scheimpflug Placido disk topographer （ Sirius）. METHODS： In this study, we enrolled healthy myopic subjects 54 （87 eyes）. The central corneal thickness （CCT, anterior chamber depth （ACD）, flat keratometry （FK readings , steep keratometry （SK） readings and white to white （WTW were measured by LS900 and Sirius. Evaluation and analysis were performed using paired t tests, the Pearson correlation, and Bland-Altman analyses. RESULTS： The CCT and ACD measurements were significantly lower whereas FK, SK and WTW measurements were higher with LS900 （ P〈0.001 ）. Mean differences were -6.11 ±6.32μ m,-0.09±0.07mm, 0.18± 0.25D, 0. 21 ± 0.36D and 0.25 ± 0. 39mm with statistical significant （ P〈0.01 ）. Pearson correlation analysis showed high correlation between the 2 devices for all measurements （ P〈 0. 001 ）. On Bland- Altman analysis, 95% limits of agreement for all measurements were 6.26 to -18.49μm; 0.04 to 0.22mm; 0.68 to 0.32D; 0.92 to 0.50D and 1.00 to 0.5mm. CONCLUSION： Anterior segment parameters evaluated with LS900 and Sirius systemare correlated well and achieve good agreement. However, there are significantly statistical differences which may be caused by the different measurement modes, so they may not be interchangeable use under certain clinical circumstances.