Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with a new optical device and a standard ultrasonic pachymeter

Gabor Nemeth, Alexis Tsorbatzoglou, Katalin Kertesz, Attila Vajas, Andras Berta, Laszlo Módis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)


Purpose: To compare central corneal thickness (CCT) values obtained with ultrasonic pachymetry and a new optical method using partial coherence interferometry (PCI). Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, Medical Health and Science Center, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary. Methods: The study comprised 136 eyes of 70 patients whose spherical refractive error was not greater than ±6.0 diopters (D) and whose keratometric astigmatism was not greater than 2.0 D. Central corneal thickness was measured 5 times with a new optical device (ACMaster, Zeiss) and with an ultrasonic pachymeter (AL-2000, Tomey). All measurements were obtained by the same investigator. Results: Mean CCT was 531.2 μm ± 3.9 (SD) with PCI and 547.8 ± 36.0 μm with the ultrasonic device. The difference between groups was significant (P = .001). There was no difference between CCT values measured in right and left eyes (P = .55) with ultrasonography and PCI (P = .67). The coefficient variation was 0.73% for PCI and 6.5% for ultrasonography. Correlation between the CCT measurements with both devices was strong and statistically significant (Spearman correlation = .91, P = .001). Conclusions: Mean CCT values measured by the PCI method were significantly smaller than those measured by the ultrasonic device. Central corneal thickness measured with PCI is more reproducible and seems to be more reliable than that measured by ultrasonography.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)460-463
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Mar 1 2006

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Ophthalmology
  • Sensory Systems

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with a new optical device and a standard ultrasonic pachymeter'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this