Agreement and repeatability of pupillometry using videokeratography and infrared devices

Abstract

Although topography pupillometry was repeatable, it underestimated the largest natural pupil diameter because of the luminance of the Placido rings. The difference in limits of agreement between the C-Scan and Masterview devices may be explained by pupil physiology and the static nature of videokeratoscopy. These results have implications when topography pupillometry is used to assess pupil diameters prior to refractive surgery. We do not recommend using pupil diameters measured by topography to preoperatively determine halo-related safety.