AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (1.2 MB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Clinical Research | Open Access

Comparison of three different instruments for vault measurements after implantable collamer lens implantation

Bo-Liang Li1,2Ming-Rui Cheng1,3,4,5Wei-Teng Chang1,3,4,5Ya-Di Lei1,3,4,5Guang-Han Xu1,3,4,5Ming-Wei Li1,3,4,5Zhi-Wei Mao1,3,4,5Xun Chen1,3,4,5( )Xiao-Ying Wang1,3,4,5( )
Fudan University Eye Ear Nose and Throat Hospital, Shanghai 200031, China
Department of Ophthalmology, Sichuan Provincial People’s Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610072, Sichuan Province, China
Key Laboratory of Myopia and Related Eye Diseases, NHC and Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Shanghai 200031, China
Shanghai Research Center of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Shanghai 200031, China
State Key Laboratory of Medical Neurobiology and MOE Frontiers Center for Brain Science, Fudan University, Shanghai 200031, China

Co-first Authors: Bo-Liang Li and Ming-Rui Cheng

Show Author Information

Abstract

AIM

To evaluate the differences and consistency of vault measurements obtained by Scheimpflug tomography (Pentacam), anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT, CASIA Ⅱ), and ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM) following implantable collamer lens (ICL) V4c implantation.

METHODS

Vault measurements were acquired using three modalities: Pentacam, CASIA Ⅱ AS-OCT, and UBM. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare the vault values obtained by the three devices. The correlation and consistency of measurements among the three instruments were assessed using the Pearson correlation coefficient, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and Bland-Altman plots.

RESULTS

This retrospective study enrolled 210 myopic eyes of 210 patients (158 women and 52 men) who underwent ICL implantation: 108 eyes had a myopic ICL V4c implanted, and 102 eyes had a toric ICL V4c implanted. The mean vault values measured by Pentacam, CASIA Ⅱ, and UBM were 452.64±204.20 μm, 538.57±203.54 μm, and 560.95±227.54 μm, respectively, with statistically significant differences among the three groups (P<0.05). Pearson correlation analysis showed strong positive correlations between vault values measured by different instruments (all P<0.001). ICC results indicated good consistency among the three measurement modalities (all P<0.001). Stratified analysis revealed that when the vault value was ≤250 μm, the correlation and consistency of measurements across the three instruments were lower than those in the medium and high vault subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Vault values measured by Pentacam are lower than those obtained by CASIA Ⅱ and UBM, with UBM yielding the highest mean vault values. Measurements from the three instruments are not interchangeable but can serve as mutual references due to their significant correlation and good overall consistency. Pentacam and CASIA Ⅱ demonstrate the highest consistency in vault measurement. Notably, when the vault value is ≤250 μm, the consistency between Pentacam and the other two instruments decreases significantly.

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
International Journal of Ophthalmology
Pages 475-482

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
Li B-L, Cheng M-R, Chang W-T, et al. Comparison of three different instruments for vault measurements after implantable collamer lens implantation. International Journal of Ophthalmology, 2026, 19(3): 475-482. https://doi.org/10.18240/ijo.2026.03.07

600

Views

36

Downloads

1

Crossref

0

Web of Science

0

Scopus

0

CSCD

Received: 07 February 2025
Accepted: 19 June 2025
Published: 18 March 2026
© 2026 International Journal of Ophthalmology Press

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).