4.6 Article

Automated Measurement of Tear Meniscus Height with the Kowa DR-1α Tear Interferometer in Both Healthy Subjects and Dry Eye Patients

期刊

INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE
卷 60, 期 6, 页码 2092-2101

出版社

ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.18-24850

关键词

tear film; dry eyes; tear meniscus; tear interferometry; meibomian gland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE. To develop and assess a method for quantitation of lower tear meniscus height (TMH) with the Kowa DR-1 alpha tear interferometer. METHODS. Sixty-nine eyes of 49 men and 20 women (36 healthy volunteers, 33 patients with aqueous-deficient dry eye [ADDE]; mean age +/- 6 SD, 50.0 +/- 14.0 years) were enrolled. TMH of each subject was measured by two observers both with DR-1 alpha and newly developed software and with anterior-segment swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT). Intra-operator repeatability and interoperator and intersession reproducibility of measurements were assessed based on the within-subject SD (Sw), coefficient of variation (CV), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreement between the two devices was assessed by regression and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS. The CV for system repeatability of DR-1a was <2.0%. The CV for intraoperator repeatability and interoperator and intersession reproducibility for DR-1a measurements was <= 9.6%, <= 4.5%, and <= 4.4% in healthy subjects, respectively, and <= 16.8%, <= 9.8%, and <= 10.3% in ADDE patients. All corresponding ICC values were >= 0.87 in healthy subjects and >= 0.48 in ADDE patients. Bland-Altman plots indicated a high level of agreement between the two devices. Schirmer test value was significantly correlated with interferometric TMH in both healthy subjects (beta = 0.59, P < 0.001) and ADDE patients (beta = 0.47, P = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS. Tear interferometry allows measurement of TMH as reliably as does SS-OCT. DR-1 alpha may inform not only the diagnosis of dry eye disease but also identification of disease subtype.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据