目的：比较新型眼前节相干光层析成像仪CASIA2和PentacamHR两种设备测量角膜顶点厚度、角膜最薄点角膜厚度、角膜最薄点位置和前房深度的差异性、相关性和一致性。

方法：前瞻性研究。选择2021-03/04在安徽医科大学附属合肥爱尔眼科医院就诊拟行屈光手术的近视患者40例80眼，分别使用CASIA2和PentacamHR测量角膜顶点厚度、最薄点角膜厚度、最薄点位置和前房深度。采用配对t检验比较各参数的差异性，采用Pearson相关系数和Bland-Altman 95%一致性界限法衡量两种仪器检查结果的相关性和一致性。

结果：与PentacamHR相比，CASIA2测量的角膜顶点厚度及角膜最薄点厚度偏小(均P<0.001)，但一致性界限窄(-26.6～11.6，-29.53～13.51μm)。CASIA2和PentacamHR测量的前房深度结果无差异(t=1.634，P=0.106)，两种仪器测量最薄点位置分布结果显示一致性较好(右眼：Z=0.000，P>0.999； 左眼：Z=0.149，P=0.882)，角膜最薄点位置的X轴位移和Y轴位移，最薄点相对于角膜顶点的距离结果均无差异(P>0.05)。

结论：CASIA2与PentacamHR测量的角膜顶点厚度、角膜最薄点厚度、角膜最薄点位置和前房深度具有较好的一致性。但在临床工作中，应考虑到两种仪器各参数间的微小差异，不建议直接替换使用，同时CASIA2极高的扫描速度使其在临床应用上较PentacamHR具有较大的优势。

METHODS: A prospective study. A total of 40 myopic patients(80 eyes)who received refractive surgery were enrolled from the March 2021 to April 2021 in Hefei Aier Eye Hospital. CASIA2 and PentacamHR were used respectively to measure apex corneal thickness, thinnest corneal thickness, position of thinnest corneal point and depth of anterior chamber. The paired t-test was used to compare the differences of the parameters. Pearson correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman 95% consistency limit method were used to measure the correlation and consistency of the two instruments.

RESULTS: The corneal apex thickness and the thinnest corneal thickness measured by CASIA2 were smaller than those measured by PentacamHR(all P<0.001), but the consistency limit was narrow(-26.6-11.6, -29.53-13.51μm). There was no significant difference between the results of anterior chamber depth measured by CASIA2 and PentacamHR(t=1.634,P=0.106). The results of the position distribution of the thinnest point measured by the two instruments showed good consistency(right eye:Z=0.000, P>0.999; left eye:Z=0.149,P=0.882), and there was no significant difference in the X-axis displacement and Y-axis displacement of the thinnest point, and the distance between the thinnest point and the corneal apex(P>0.05).

CONCLUSION:The apex corneal thickness, the thinnest corneal thickness, the position of the thinnest corneal point and the anterior chamber depth measured by the CASIA2 and PentacamHR are in good consistency. However, in clinical work, the slight differences between the parameters of the two instruments should be taken into consideration, and it is not recommended to replace them directly.Moreover, the extremely high scanning speed of CASIA2 makes it more advantageous than PentacamHR in clinical application.