[Advantages of the autorefractometer and the Orbscan for measuring pupil diameter].

Purpose: We compared pupil size measurements obtained with the Orbscan and autorefractometer to the Colvard Infrared pupillometer in order to determine their respective clinical advantages.
Material and Methods: We prospectively measured the pupil diameter in 94 eyes of 47 normal patients using the Colvard device, the Nikon NKR 8000 autorefractometer, and the Orbscan device. For each device, two successive measurements were taken to determine its reproducibility. We also studied the relationship with the contralateral eye (i.e., difference and correlation). The measurements obtained with the different devices in different light intensities were compared and studied using regression analysis.
Results: Pupil diameter measured using the Orbscan had the highest reproducibility (mean difference between the two successive measurements: 3.8% or 0.15mm) and showed the smallest difference between the two eyes (5.0% or 0.19mm) and the strongest correlation with the contralateral eye (r=0.93; p<0.001). Scotopic Colvard measurements and autorefractometer measurements with low light settings were not significantly different (5.86mm versus 5.86mm; p=0.48). Autorefractometer measurements with low light settings showed the strongest correlation with the scotopic Colvard measurements (r=0.84; p<0.001). The Orbscan measurements were less correlated with the scotopic or photopic Colvard measurements (r=0.73; p<0.001 and r=0.51; p=0.003, respectively). For the Colvard pupillometer, the correlation between photopic measurements and scotopic measurements was also poor (r=0.51; p<0.001).
Conclusion: Pupil size measurements with the autorefractometer may be advantageous before refractive surgery. Measuring pupil size in photopic conditions, as with the Orbscan, cannot screen people with large pupils in mesopic conditions.