M A Terry1, P J Ousley. 1. Lions Eye Bank of Oregon Research Laboratory, Portland, USA. materry@teleport.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: Current methods of screening donor eyes for corneal transplantation are not always effective in excluding corneas with abnormal topography. We used the Orbscan to determine whether corneal-thickness maps could be used as a technique for donor tissue screening. METHODS: Forty eye-bank eyes were measured with the Orbscan, and a corneal-thickness map was generated. Average central pachymetry measurements from each map were compared with the thinnest midperipheral thickness reading. Two eyes from a donor who had photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and two eyes from a donor with keratoconus were then compared with the normal donor eye results. RESULTS: The average difference between the thinnest midperipheral pachymetry and the central pachymetry in the control group was 0.040 +/- 0.026 mm. The eyes from the donor with PRK showed larger disparities between the central and midperipheral thicknesses because of the thinned central cornea, with differences of 0.154 mm in the right eye and 0.106 mm in the left eye. The eyes from the donor with keratoconus had midperipheral corneas that were thinner than the center, indicating eccentric, ectatic cones. The differences in thickness between the center and midperiphery in the eyes from the donor with PRK and the donor with keratoconus differed from the control group by >2 SD. CONCLUSIONS: Diseases or surgery that affect the relationship between the central and midperipheral corneal thickness may be screened through Orbscan pachymetry mapping with comparison with a normal range.
PURPOSE: Current methods of screening donor eyes for corneal transplantation are not always effective in excluding corneas with abnormal topography. We used the Orbscan to determine whether corneal-thickness maps could be used as a technique for donor tissue screening. METHODS: Forty eye-bank eyes were measured with the Orbscan, and a corneal-thickness map was generated. Average central pachymetry measurements from each map were compared with the thinnest midperipheral thickness reading. Two eyes from a donor who had photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and two eyes from a donor with keratoconus were then compared with the normal donor eye results. RESULTS: The average difference between the thinnest midperipheral pachymetry and the central pachymetry in the control group was 0.040 +/- 0.026 mm. The eyes from the donor with PRK showed larger disparities between the central and midperipheral thicknesses because of the thinned central cornea, with differences of 0.154 mm in the right eye and 0.106 mm in the left eye. The eyes from the donor with keratoconus had midperipheral corneas that were thinner than the center, indicating eccentric, ectatic cones. The differences in thickness between the center and midperiphery in the eyes from the donor with PRK and the donor with keratoconus differed from the control group by >2 SD. CONCLUSIONS: Diseases or surgery that affect the relationship between the central and midperipheral corneal thickness may be screened through Orbscan pachymetry mapping with comparison with a normal range.