PURPOSE: To compare corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), spherical equivalent (SE), average central keratometry (K-Avg), corneal astigmatism (CA), corneal volume (CV), anterior chamber (AC) depth, and central corneal thickness (CCT) between patients with mild keratoconus and healthy controls and to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of CH and CRF in discriminating mild keratoconus from healthy corneas. DESIGN: Comparative case series. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-three eyes (40 patients) with mild keratoconus (group 1) and 80 eyes from 40 gender- and age-matched controls (group 2). METHODS: Patients underwent a complete clinical eye examination, corneal topography (Humphrey ATLAS; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), tomography (Pentacam; Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany), and biomechanical evaluations (ocular response analyzer; Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Depew, NY). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to identify cutoff points that maximized sensitivity and specificity in discriminating mild keratoconus from normal corneas. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Corneal hysteresis, CRF, SE, K-Avg, CA, CV, AC depth, and CCT. The diagnostic performance of CH and CRF for detecting mild keratoconus was assessed using the ROC curve. RESULTS: In group 1 versus group 2, the SE values (mean+/-standard deviation) were -3.55+/-2.87 diopters (D) versus -1.46+/-3.09 D (P = 0); K-Avg, 45.09+/-2.24 versus 43.24+/-1.54 D (P = 0); CA, 3.15+/-1.87 versus 1.07+/-0.83 D (P = 0); CV, 57.3+/-2.12 versus 60.86+/-3.39 mm3 (P = 0); AC depth, 3.19+/-0.35 versus 3.05+/-0.43 mm (P = 0.0416); CCT, 503+/-34.15 versus 544.71+/-35.89 microm (P = 0); CH, 8.50+/-1.36 versus 10.17+/-1.79 mmHg (P = 0); CRF, 7.85+/-1.49 versus 10.13+/-2.0 mmHg (P = 0). The ROC curve analyses showed a poor overall predictive accuracy of CH (cutoff, 9.64 mmHg; sensitivity, 87%; specificity, 65%; test accuracy, 74.83%) and CRF (cutoff, 9.60 mmHg; sensitivity, 90.5%; specificity, 66%; test accuracy, 76.97%) for detecting mild keratoconus. CONCLUSIONS: The values for CH, CRF, CV, and CCT were statistically lower and those for SE, K-Avg, CA, and AC depth were statistically higher in patients with mild keratoconus compared with controls. Corneal hysteresis and CRF were poor parameters for discriminating between mild keratoconus and normal corneas. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references. Copyright 2010 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PURPOSE: To compare corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), spherical equivalent (SE), average central keratometry (K-Avg), corneal astigmatism (CA), corneal volume (CV), anterior chamber (AC) depth, and central corneal thickness (CCT) between patients with mild keratoconus and healthy controls and to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of CH and CRF in discriminating mild keratoconus from healthy corneas. DESIGN: Comparative case series. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-three eyes (40 patients) with mild keratoconus (group 1) and 80 eyes from 40 gender- and age-matched controls (group 2). METHODS:Patients underwent a complete clinical eye examination, corneal topography (Humphrey ATLAS; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA), tomography (Pentacam; Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany), and biomechanical evaluations (ocular response analyzer; Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Depew, NY). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to identify cutoff points that maximized sensitivity and specificity in discriminating mild keratoconus from normal corneas. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Corneal hysteresis, CRF, SE, K-Avg, CA, CV, AC depth, and CCT. The diagnostic performance of CH and CRF for detecting mild keratoconus was assessed using the ROC curve. RESULTS: In group 1 versus group 2, the SE values (mean+/-standard deviation) were -3.55+/-2.87 diopters (D) versus -1.46+/-3.09 D (P = 0); K-Avg, 45.09+/-2.24 versus 43.24+/-1.54 D (P = 0); CA, 3.15+/-1.87 versus 1.07+/-0.83 D (P = 0); CV, 57.3+/-2.12 versus 60.86+/-3.39 mm3 (P = 0); AC depth, 3.19+/-0.35 versus 3.05+/-0.43 mm (P = 0.0416); CCT, 503+/-34.15 versus 544.71+/-35.89 microm (P = 0); CH, 8.50+/-1.36 versus 10.17+/-1.79 mmHg (P = 0); CRF, 7.85+/-1.49 versus 10.13+/-2.0 mmHg (P = 0). The ROC curve analyses showed a poor overall predictive accuracy of CH (cutoff, 9.64 mmHg; sensitivity, 87%; specificity, 65%; test accuracy, 74.83%) and CRF (cutoff, 9.60 mmHg; sensitivity, 90.5%; specificity, 66%; test accuracy, 76.97%) for detecting mild keratoconus. CONCLUSIONS: The values for CH, CRF, CV, and CCT were statistically lower and those for SE, K-Avg, CA, and AC depth were statistically higher in patients with mild keratoconus compared with controls. Corneal hysteresis and CRF were poor parameters for discriminating between mild keratoconus and normal corneas. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references. Copyright 2010 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: David P Piñero; Rafael J Pérez-Cambrodí; Roberto Soto-Negro; Pedro Ruiz-Fortes; Alberto Artola Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2015-09-07 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Orhan Ayar; Mehmet Cuneyt Ozmen; Orkun Muftuoglu; Mehmet Orcun Akdemir; Mustafa Koc; Kemal Ozulken Journal: Int J Ophthalmol Date: 2015-12-18 Impact factor: 1.779
Authors: Matthew T Feng; Michael W Belin; Renato Ambrósio; Satinder P S Grewal; Wang Yan; Mohamed S Shaheen; Charles McGhee; Naoyuki Maeda; Tobias H Neuhann; H Burkhard Dick; Saleh A Alageel; Andreas Steinmueller Journal: Saudi J Ophthalmol Date: 2011-04-30