应用双通道客观视觉质量分析系统与光线追踪波阵面像差系统分析正常人眼调制传递函数
응용쌍통도객관시각질량분석계통여광선추종파진면상차계통분석정상인안조제전체함수
Comparison of ocular modulation transfer function measurements by ray tracing wavefront technology and double-pass system
  • 万方数据
    中华眼科杂志 중화안과잡지
    Chinese Journal of Ophthalmology
    2015年 1期 20-25 ,共6页

    乔利亚%蔡啸谷%万修华%管征%熊瑛%林仲%张烨%谭家璿%王宁利

    교리아%채소곡%만수화%관정%웅영%림중%장엽%담가선%왕저리

    角膜波前像差%像差测量%诊断技术,眼科%对比敏感度%视敏度 角膜波前像差%像差測量%診斷技術,眼科%對比敏感度%視敏度
    각막파전상차%상차측량%진단기술,안과%대비민감도%시민도
    Corneal wavefront aberration%Aberrometry%Diagnostic techniques,ophthalmological%Contrast sensitivity%Visual acuity
    目的 比较双通道客观视觉质量分析系统(OQASⅡ)与光线追踪波阵面像差系统(iTrace)测量正常人眼调制传递函数(MTF)的一致性,寻找更准确的客观视觉质量评价手段.方法 对比研究.连续收集前往设置在邯郸市永年县东杨庄中心卫生院的邯郸眼病研究检查现场健康受试者进行研究,对排除眼部疾病后的受试者进行散瞳前对比敏感度检查、散瞳后使用OQASⅡ与iTrace测量全眼MTF.比较两者在4.0和6.0 mm瞳孔直径下5、10、15、20、25、30周/度(c/d)空间频率下消除低阶像差影响后的MTF均值,对符合正态分布的两种仪器在不同空间频率的MTF测量值进行配对t检验.绘制Bland-Altman图进行一致性评价,并分别对两种仪器的MTF测量值与最佳矫正视力、不同空间频率下对比敏感度进行Spearman秩相关分析.结果 共有163例(251只眼)患者入选本研究,其中男性81例(139只眼),女性82例(112只眼),年龄30 ～ 60岁,平均(44.1±9.7)岁.在4.0 mm瞳孔直径下iTrace在5、10、15、20、25、30 c/d空间频率下的MTF均值分别为0.730±0.138、0.431 ±0.159、0.262±0.120、0.169 ±0.078、0.118 ±0.053、0.094±0.043,OQASⅡ分别为0.347±0.123、0.162 ±0.086、0.072 ±0.049、0.042±0.033、0.026±0.022、0.017 ±0.022,两种仪器的差异均有统计学意义(t=38.72,28.03,27.32,27.59,29.23,28.96;P ＜0.01);在6.0 mm瞳孔直径下,两种仪器的差异也有统计学意义(t =4.60,3.19,9.34,13.41,16.96,20.24;P ＜0.01).Bland-Altman一致性分析法提示两者一致性较差,但在6.0 mm瞳孔直径两者一致性有所提高.iTrace MTF测量值与最佳矫正视力呈负相关(r=-0.139～-0.165,P＜0.01),部分空间频率MTF值与6 c/d空间频率对比敏感度Log值呈正相关(r=0.163 ～0.175),P＜0.05);OQASⅡMTF值与最佳矫正视力呈负相关(r=0.239 ～0.303,P＜0.01),各空间频率MTF值与3、6、12、18 c/d空间频率对比敏感度Log值均呈正相关(r =0.156～0.398,P＜0.01).结论 iTrace与OQAS在正常人眼MTF测量存在明显差异,瞳孔直径较大时两者差值较小;双通道技术为临床人眼光学质量评估提供了一种新的手段.
    목적 비교쌍통도객관시각질량분석계통(OQASⅡ)여광선추종파진면상차계통(iTrace)측량정상인안조제전체함수(MTF)적일치성,심조경준학적객관시각질량평개수단.방법 대비연구.련속수집전왕설치재함단시영년현동양장중심위생원적함단안병연구검사현장건강수시자진행연구,대배제안부질병후적수시자진행산동전대비민감도검사、산동후사용OQASⅡ여iTrace측량전안MTF.비교량자재4.0화6.0 mm동공직경하5、10、15、20、25、30주/도(c/d)공간빈솔하소제저계상차영향후적MTF균치,대부합정태분포적량충의기재불동공간빈솔적MTF측량치진행배대t검험.회제Bland-Altman도진행일치성평개,병분별대량충의기적MTF측량치여최가교정시력、불동공간빈솔하대비민감도진행Spearman질상관분석.결과 공유163례(251지안)환자입선본연구,기중남성81례(139지안),녀성82례(112지안),년령30 ～ 60세,평균(44.1±9.7)세.재4.0 mm동공직경하iTrace재5、10、15、20、25、30 c/d공간빈솔하적MTF균치분별위0.730±0.138、0.431 ±0.159、0.262±0.120、0.169 ±0.078、0.118 ±0.053、0.094±0.043,OQASⅡ분별위0.347±0.123、0.162 ±0.086、0.072 ±0.049、0.042±0.033、0.026±0.022、0.017 ±0.022,량충의기적차이균유통계학의의(t=38.72,28.03,27.32,27.59,29.23,28.96;P ＜0.01);재6.0 mm동공직경하,량충의기적차이야유통계학의의(t =4.60,3.19,9.34,13.41,16.96,20.24;P ＜0.01).Bland-Altman일치성분석법제시량자일치성교차,단재6.0 mm동공직경량자일치성유소제고.iTrace MTF측량치여최가교정시력정부상관(r=-0.139～-0.165,P＜0.01),부분공간빈솔MTF치여6 c/d공간빈솔대비민감도Log치정정상관(r=0.163 ～0.175),P＜0.05);OQASⅡMTF치여최가교정시력정부상관(r=0.239 ～0.303,P＜0.01),각공간빈솔MTF치여3、6、12、18 c/d공간빈솔대비민감도Log치균정정상관(r =0.156～0.398,P＜0.01).결론 iTrace여OQAS재정상인안MTF측량존재명현차이,동공직경교대시량자차치교소;쌍통도기술위림상인안광학질량평고제공료일충신적수단.
    Objective To compare the agreement of the ocular modulation transfer function (MTF)measured by double-pass system and ray tracing wavefront aberrometry,and to analyze the correlations of two MTFs with the visual acuity and contrast sensitivity function results.Methods Comparative study.Subjects with no ocular diseases were consecutively enrolled in an epidemic study field located at the Dongyangzhuang Health Center,Yongnian County,Handan City,Hebei Province,China.After comprehensive ophthalmic examinations,the mean values of subtracted lower order aberration MTF at 5,10,15,20,25,and 30 cycle/degree(c/d) spatial frequencies were obtained with a double-pass system(optical quality analysis system Ⅱ,OQAS Ⅱ system)and a ray tracing wavefront aberrometer(iTrace visual function analyzer,iTrace system)in the 4.0 mm and 6.0 mm pupil after dilation,respectively.Paired-sample t test and Bland-Altman analysis were used to compare the difference and agreement of MTFs obtained with two instruments.Correlation analysis was preformed between two MTF measurement results and subjective visual quality including visual acuity and contrast sensitivity function.Results Two hundred and fifty-one healthy eyes of 163 subjects were enrolled,aged 30 to 60,mean (44.1 ±9.7) years,including 139 eyes of 81 males and 112 eyes of 82 females.The mean value of MTF at 5,10,15,20.25,30 c/d obtained by iTrace in 4.0 mm pupil were 0.730 ±0.138、0.431 ± 0.159、0.262 ±0.120、0.169 ±0.078、0.118 ±0.053、0.094 ±0.043.The value obtained by OQAS Ⅱ were 0.347 ± 0.123、0.162 ± 0.086、0.072 ± 0.049、0.042 ± 0.033、0.026 ± 0.022、0.017 ±0.022,The result of iTrace were all significant higher than OQAS in both 4mm(t =38.72,28.03,27.32,27.59,29.23,28.96,P＜0.01) and 6.0 mm(t =4.60,3.19,9.34,13.41,16.96,20.24,P ＜0.01)pupil diameter.The iTrace-OQAS Ⅱ MTF difference was smaller in the 6.0 mm pupil.Bland-Altman analysis indicated that the agreement of two instruments was poor,while the limits of agreement improved in the 6.0 mm pupil.The iTrace-derived MTFs were negatively correlated with the subjects' LogMAR best corrected visual acuity (r =-0.139--0.165,P ＜ 0.01) and positively with the log value of contrast sensitivity function at 6 c/d(P ＜0.05).OQAS-derived MTFs were negatively correlated with LogMAR best corrected visual acuity(r =0.239-0.303,P ＜ 0.01) and positively with contrast sensitivity at all spatial frequencies(r =0.156-0.398,P ＜ 0.01).Conclusions There exists a significant difference and poor agreement in MTF measurement based on the ray tracing wavefront aberrometer and the double-pass system,while the difference becomes smaller in a large pupil diameter.The double-pass system provides a useful tool in clinical optical quality evaluation.
    원문보기 원문다운로드 사이트로이동
저자의 최근 논문