• 1.

    Thijssen JM. The history of ultrasound techniques in ophthalmology. Ultrasound Med Biol 1993;19:599618.

  • 2.

    Schiffer SP, Rantanen NW & Leary GA, et al. Biometric study of canine eye, using A-mode ultrasonography. Am J Vet Res 1982;43:826830.

  • 3.

    Leary GA, Young FA. Reliability and validity of ultrasonographic measurements in primates. In: Gitter K, Keeney, Sarin A, et al, eds. Ophthalmic ultrasound (Copenhagen). St Louis: CV Mosby Co, 1969;117121.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Olsen T. The accuracy of ultrasonic measurement of the axial length of the eye. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1989;67:141144.

  • 5.

    Butcher JM, O'Brien C. The reproducibility of biometry and keratometry measurements. Eye 1991;5:708711.

  • 6.

    Lizzi FL, Coleman DJ. History of ophthalmic ultrasound. J Ultrasound Med 2004;23:12551266.

  • 7.

    Fledelius HC. Ultrasound in ophthalmology. Ultrasound Med Biol 1997;23:365375.

  • 8.

    Cottrill NB, Banks WJ, Pechman RD. Ultrasonographic and biometric evaluation of the eye and orbits of dogs. Am J Vet Res 1989;50:898903.

  • 9.

    El-Maghraby HM, Nyland TG, Bellhorn RW. Ultrasonograhic and biometric evaluation of sheep and cattle eyes. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 1995;36:148151.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Hamidzada WA, Osuobeni EP. Agreement between A-mode and B-mode ultrasonography in the measurement of ocular distances. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 1999;40:502507.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Mattoon JS, Nyland TG. Eye. In: Nyland TG, Mattoon JS, eds. Small animal diagnostic ultrasound. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co, 2002;305324.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Hager DA, Dziezyc J, Millichamp NJ. Two-dimensional realtime ocular ultrasonography in the dog. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 1987;27:2429.

  • 13.

    Williams DL. Lens morphometry determined by B-mode ultrasonography of the normal and cataracterous canine lens. Vet Ophthalmol 2004;7:9193.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Giers U, Epple C. Untersuchungen zur Reliabilität ultrasonographischer Biometrien. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 1990;196:171178.

  • 15.

    Zadnik K, Mutti DO, Adams AJ. The repeatability of measurement of the ocular components. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1992;33:23252333.

  • 16.

    Hennessy MP, Chan F, Chan DG. Contact versus immersion biometry of axial length before cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2003;29:21952198.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Findl O, Kriechbaum K & Kiss B, et al. Influence of operator experience on the performance of ultrasound biometry compared to optical biometry before cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2003;29:19501955.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Bentley E, Miller PE, Diehl KA. Evaluation of intra- and interobserver reliability and image reproducibility to assess usefulness of high-resolution ultrasonography for measurement of anterior segment structures of canine eyes. Am J Vet Res 2005;66:17751779.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307310.

  • 20.

    Altman DG, Bland JM. Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies. Statistician 1983;32:307310.

  • 21.

    Schulze RK, Curic D, Hoedt B. B-mode versus A-mode ultrasonographic measurements of mucosal thickness in vivo. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2002;93:110117.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Binkhorst RD. The accuracy of ultrasonic measurement of the axial length of the eye. Ophthalmic Surg 1981;12:363365.

  • 23.

    Ekesten B. Biological variability and measurement error variability in ocular biometry in Samoyed dogs. Acta Vet Scand 1994;35:427433.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Colton T. Statistics in medicine. Boston: Little, Brown & Co, 1974;372.

  • 25.

    Gaiddon J, Rosolen SG & Steru L, et al. Use of biometry and keratometry for determining optimal power for intraocular lens implants in dogs. Am J Vet Res 1991;52:781783.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Nyland TG, Mattoon JS & Herrgesell EJ, et al. Physical principles, instrumentations, and safety of diagnostic ultrasound. In: Nyland TG, Mattoon JS, eds. Small animal diagnostic ultrasound. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co, 2002;118.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Samuelson DA. Ophthalmic embryology and anatomy. In: Gelatt KN, ed. Veterinary ophthalmology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1991;3122.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Boroffka SAEB. Pre- and postnatal development of the eyes in Beagles. An ultrasonographic study. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2005;46:7279.

  • 29.

    Norrby S. Multicenter biometry study of 1 pair of eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001;27:16561661.

  • 30.

    Norrby S, Lydahl EL & Koranyi G, et al. Comparison of 2 A-scans. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002;29:9598.

  • 31.

    Coleman DJ. Ultrasonic measurements of eye dimensions. Int Ophthalmol Clin 1979;19:225236.

  • 32.

    Berges O, Puech M & Assouline M, et al. B-mode-guided vector A-mode versus A-mode biometry to determine the axial length and intraocular lens power. J Cataract Refract Surg 1998;74:529535.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Sunder P, Ilango B, Watson A. Measurement of axial length in the calculation of intraocular lens power. Eye 1998;12:227229.

  • 34.

    Jannson F, Sundmark E. Determination of the velocity of ultrasound in ocular tissues at different temperatures. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1961;39:899906.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35.

    Hoffer KJ. Preoperative evaluation of cataractous patient. Surv Ophthalmol 1984;29:5569.

  • 36.

    Görig C, Varghese T & Stiles T, et al. Evaluation of acoustic wave propagation velocities in the ocular lens and vitreous tissues of pigs, dogs, and rabbits. Am J Vet Res 2006;67:288295.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Intraobserver and interobserver repeatability of ocular biometric measurements obtained by means of B-mode ultrasonography in dogs

View More View Less
  • 1 Division of Diagnostic Imaging, Department of Clinical Sciences of Companion Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 10, 3508 TD Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • | 2 Division of Diagnostic Imaging, Department of Clinical Sciences of Companion Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 10, 3508 TD Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • | 3 Division of Ophthalmology, Department of Clinical Sciences of Companion Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 10, 3508 TD Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • | 4 Division of Internal Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences of Companion Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 10, 3508 TD Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Abstract

Objective—To assess intra- and interobserver repeatability of ocular biometric measurements obtained by means of high-resolution B-mode ultrasonography in dogs.

Animals—6 Beagles without ocular abnormalities.

Procedures—B-mode ultrasonography was performed bilaterally with a 10.5-MHz broadband compact linear array transducer. All measurements were made on 2 different occasions by 2 observers. The Bland-Altman method was used to assess agreement between measurements obtained by the 2 observers and between the 2 sets of measurements obtained by each observer.

Results—Intra- and interobserver repeatability was highest for larger measurements, such as depth of the eye and depth of the anterior chamber. When repeatability was examined, bias was significantly different from 0 for only a few measurements, but the percentage difference between observations was as high as 180% for some measurements.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggest that most measurements of intraocular distances and structures obtained by means of high-resolution B-mode ultrasonography have acceptable intra- and interobserver repeatability. However, the percentage difference between observations can be high for smaller measurements.

Abstract

Objective—To assess intra- and interobserver repeatability of ocular biometric measurements obtained by means of high-resolution B-mode ultrasonography in dogs.

Animals—6 Beagles without ocular abnormalities.

Procedures—B-mode ultrasonography was performed bilaterally with a 10.5-MHz broadband compact linear array transducer. All measurements were made on 2 different occasions by 2 observers. The Bland-Altman method was used to assess agreement between measurements obtained by the 2 observers and between the 2 sets of measurements obtained by each observer.

Results—Intra- and interobserver repeatability was highest for larger measurements, such as depth of the eye and depth of the anterior chamber. When repeatability was examined, bias was significantly different from 0 for only a few measurements, but the percentage difference between observations was as high as 180% for some measurements.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggest that most measurements of intraocular distances and structures obtained by means of high-resolution B-mode ultrasonography have acceptable intra- and interobserver repeatability. However, the percentage difference between observations can be high for smaller measurements.

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Boroffka.