Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 14, 2025

Author Spotlight: Advancements in Refractive Surgical Correction for Presbyopia and Exploring Postoperative Visual Acuity
Published on: September 20, 2024
Comparison of corneal measurements using two different Scheimpflug analyzers in Sirius and Pentacam devices
Parisa Abdi1, Mehrnaz Atighehchian2, Amir Reza Farsiani3
1Farabi Eye Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract:
The aim was to compare measurements of anterior segment biometry parameters using two Scheimpflug tomographies, Pentacam and Sirius to assess the agreement. Prospective cross-sectional observational study. A total of 60 eyes of 30 healthy subjects were included and evaluated with Pentacam followed by Sirius imaging. Corneal indices were performed with two modalities in both eyes including; apical corneal thickness (ACT), corneal thickness at pupil site(PCT), thinnest corneal thickness (TCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), chamber angle, chamber volume, cornea volume, mean front keratometry (FKm), the radius of corneal curvature at the anterior and posterior surface in steep and flat meridian, anterior astigmatism values, pupil diameter, and horizontal corneal diameter. The Bland-Altman graph and ICC (intra-class correlation were used to establish an agreement and present the similarity of the findings. Most parameters showed perfect agreement. In both devices, the ICC was more than 0.91 in all measurements except for ACD (ICC = 0.820), cylinder axis (ICC = 0.520), TCT(ICC = 0.881), ACT(ICC = 0.672), PCT (ICC = 0.882), chamber angle (ICC = 0.362), pupil diameter(ICC = 0.137). Pentacam yielded higher values that were significant in five parameters including 3.47 μm for TCT, 4.29 µm for PCT, 10.03 mm3 for chamber volume,2.67 mm3 for cornea volume, and 1.49 mm for pupil diameter but there was only a statistically significant difference in cornea volume and pupil diameter (p-value < 0.001). However, in Pentacam only the chamber angle value was 6.44 mm3 lower than Sirius, with a statistically significant difference (p-value < 0.001). Although these two devices had some statistically different results, it seems that they have a good agreement and correlation in most parameters.
More Related Videos
06:19Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia
Published on: September 27, 2024
07:44In vivo Structural Assessments of Ocular Disease in Rodent Models using Optical Coherence Tomography
Published on: July 24, 2020