Loading…

Measurements of central corneal thickness and endothelial parameters with three different non-contact specular microscopy devices

We aimed to compare the measurements of central corneal thickness (CCT) and endothelial parameters with three different non-contact specular microscopy (SM) devices. Fifteen eyes of 15 healthy individuals (6 males; 9 females) were enrolled in the study. Mean age was 37.93 ± 15.13 years. Endothelial...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International ophthalmology 2017-02, Vol.37 (1), p.229-233
Main Authors: Cakici, Ozgur, Karadag, Remzi, Bayramlar, Huseyin, Koyun, Efe
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We aimed to compare the measurements of central corneal thickness (CCT) and endothelial parameters with three different non-contact specular microscopy (SM) devices. Fifteen eyes of 15 healthy individuals (6 males; 9 females) were enrolled in the study. Mean age was 37.93 ± 15.13 years. Endothelial parameters and CCT were measured with Nidek CEM-530, Topcon SP-3000P, and Tomey EM-3000 SM devices by the same physician. Endothelial parameters included endothelial cell count (ECC), maximum, minimum, and average endothelial cell size. and hexagonality ratio. There were no statistically significant differences in ECC, CTT, and average endothelial size (AES) between the devices ( p  > 0.05). The measurement of maximum endothelial size (MES) was different between Nidek SM and Topcon SM devices ( p  = 0.001), but there was no difference in MES between Nidek SM and Tomey SM ( p  = 0.058), and between Topcon SM and Tomey SM ( p  = 0.081). There was no difference in minimum endothelial size (MinES) between Nidek SM and Topcon SM ( p  = 0.794); however, there was a significant difference in MinES between Tomey SM and Nidek SM ( p  
ISSN:0165-5701
1573-2630
DOI:10.1007/s10792-016-0264-x