Measurement of corneal thickness using Pentacam HR versus Nidek CEM-530 specular microscopy. Issue 4 (October 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: De Bernardo, Maddalena; Cornetta, Palmiro; Marotta, Giuseppe; Salerno, Giulio; De Pascale, Ilaria; Rosa, Nicola
• Is Part Of: Journal of international medical research. Volume 48:Issue 4(2020)
• Publication Date: 2020-10
• Subjects: Cornea -- corneal thickness -- Pentacam HR -- CEM-530 -- specular microscopy -- regression formula; Medicine -- Periodicals; Pharmacology -- Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1177/0300060519892385
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0300-0605

Abstract

Objective: To compare corneal thickness (CT) measurements using the CEM-530 (Nidal, Gamagori, Japan) and Pentacam HR (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany). Methods: The CT of 209 healthy subjects (209 right eyes) aged 24 to 89 years (71.35 ± 10.72 years) was measured at the corneal apex (CA), pupil center (PC), and thinnest point (TP) with the Pentacam HR and at the corneal center with the CEM-530 in random order at the same time of day. Results: A good correlation but statistically significant difference was found between the CEM-530 and Pentacam HR measurements at the CA (6.10 ± 8.12 µm, R 2 = 0.8947), PC (7.46 ± 8.57 µm, R 2 = 0.8826), and TP (12.44 ± 10.04 µm, R 2 = 0.8392). Comparison of the two devices produced the following regression formulas: y = 0.8859x + 57.644 for the CA, y = 0.8852x +56.657 for the PC, and y = 0.8557x + 68.148 for the TP, where x is the CT obtained with the CEM-530 and y is that obtained with the Pentacam HR. Conclusions: These findings indicate that the CEM-530 produces a thicker corneal measurement than the Pentacam HR. The herein-proposed correcting factors are needed to reliably compare these devices.