Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Keratometry Evaluations With the Pentacam High Resolution in Comparison With the Automated Keratometry and Conventional Corneal Topography

Módis, László Jr MD, PhD; Szalai, Eszter MD; Kolozsvári, Bence MD; Németh, Gábor MD, PhD; Vajas, Attila MD; Berta, András MD, PhD, DSc

doi: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e318204c666
Clinical Science

Purpose: To determine the reliability and repeatability of keratometry (K) measurements obtained with the Pentacam high resolution (HR), automated keratometry, and corneal topography systems.

Methods: The right eyes of 46 healthy subjects were examined prospectively. Keratometry measurements in the flat (Kf) and steep (Ks) meridians were taken by 2 independent investigators with the Pentacam HR (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) followed by automated keratorefractometry (KR-8100; Topcon, Tokyo, Japan), and corneal topography (TMS-4; Tomey, Erlangen, Germany).

Results: The mean K readings of the Pentacam HR, automated keratometry, and corneal topography were 43.40/43.34 diopter (D), 43.99/43.98 D, and 43.80/43.83 D, respectively. The difference between the values was statistically significant (P < 0.0001, repeated measures analysis of variance). Strong significant correlation was observed between the Pentacam HR and keratometry (Kf: r = 0.952/0.954; Ks: r = 0.845, Spearman rank test), and Pentacam HR and corneal topography (Kf: r = 0.933/0.930; Ks: r = 0.838/0.829) (P < 0.0001). No significant difference was presented between the 2 investigators for any of the instruments (P = 0.215–0.983). Moreover, high correlation was found between the K readings of the observers (interoperator intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.95 to 0.99).

Conclusions: The Pentacam HR provided reliable K measurements in clinical practice in comparison with an automated keratometer and a corneal topographer. Based on the results, for patient follow-up, one keratometry device is recommended.

From the Medical and Health Science Center, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary.

Received for publication December 11, 2009; revision received September 17, 2010; accepted November 2, 2010.

The authors have no proprietary interests or conflict of interest in this study.

Reprints: László Módis, Jr, Medical and Health Science Center, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Debrecen, H-4012 Debrecen, Nagyerdei krt. 98, Hungary (e-mail:

Copyright © 2012 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.