眼前段光学相干断层扫描仪与A超测量中央前房深度的比较

目的前房深度是晶状体性屈光手术和青光眼手术的重要依据之一。为此探讨眼前段光学相干断层扫描仪测量中央前房深度与A型超声测量结果的一致性。方法对白内障30例（45眼）分别使用眼前段光学相干断层扫描仪及A超测量中央前房深度。采用配对t检验对之进行比较;用相关分析方法分析两种仪器测量值之间的相关性;随机选择1眼分别用两种仪器依次重复测量中央前房深度10次,采用变异系数作为评判标准,比较测量的可重复性。结果眼前段光学相干断层扫描仪测量中央前房深度的平均值为（2.63±0.48）mm,A超测量结果为（2.98±0.48）mm;眼前段光学相干断层扫描仪测量的中央前房深度比A超的测量值小（0.35±0.04）mm,眼前段光学相干断层扫描仪与A超测量中央前房深度各值有较好的相关性（r=0.894,P〈0.001）。眼前段光学相干断层扫描仪测量中央前房深度10次变异系数为0.78%,A超测量中央前房深度10次的变异系数为1.49%。结论眼前段光学相干断层扫描仪测量前房深度值比A超测量中央前房深度的各值小;两种仪器检测中央前房深度的测量值相关性较好;眼前段光学相干断层扫描仪测量结果的重复性稍好于A超。临床工作中应把二者结合起来,综合分析。

Comparison between anterior segment optical coherence tomographer and A ultrasound in measuring central anterior chamber depth

Objective Anterior chamber depth （ACD） is an important data for cataract and glaucoma surgery. We investigate the difference of central ACD measured by anterior segment optical coherence tomographer （AS-OCT） and A ultrasonography. The repeatability was compared. Methods The central ACD of 45 eyes of 30 cataract patients were measured by AS-OCT and A ultrasonography respectively. The ACD by AS-OCT and A ultrasonography were compared using paired samples t-test. The correlation of ACDs between AS-OCT and A ultrasonography were analyzed using linear regression analysis. ACD of one eye selected randomly was measured 10 times by the above 2 instruments respectively,and repeatability of the 2 instruments was analyzed using coefficient of variation. Results The mean ACD measured by AS-OCT and by A ultrasonography were （2.63±0.48）mm and （2.98±0.48）mm respectively. The ACD by AS-OCT was （0.35±0.04） mm thinner than that of ACD by A ultrasonography. There were positive correlationship between ACD by AS-OCT and by A ultrasonography （r=0.894,P〈0.001）. The coefficient of variation of ACD by AS-OCT was 0.78%,The coefficient of variation of ACD by A ultrasonography was 1.49%. Conclusion The mean ACD measured by AS-OCT is thinner than that by A ultrasonography.There is excellent correlationship between AS-OCT and A ultrasonography.The repeatability of ACD by AS-OCT is better than that by A ultrasonography. Enough consideration should be made for clinical evaluation of these results.