PURPOSE: To evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, and test accuracy of corneal biomechanical metrics and anterior segment data in differentiating keratoconus from healthy corneas. METHODS: Comparative case series. Patients with and without keratoconus (gender and age-matched) were submitted for complete eye examinations including corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) as measured by the Ocular Response Analyzer and anterior segment data as gathered through Pentacam assessments. The anterior segment data measurement included average central keratometric readings (K-Ave), corneal astigmatism (CA), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (AC depth) and corneal volume (CV). All parameters were assessed, compared and analyzed. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to identify the best cutoff point by which to maximize the sensitivity and specificity of discriminating keratoconus from normal corneas for each data category. RESULTS: Seventy seven eyes from forty three patients (24 male, 19 female) with keratoconus and eighty six eyes from forty three (24 male, 19 female) healthy controls were enrolled. ROC curve analysis showed poor overall predictive accuracy for all studied parameters in differentiating keratoconus from normal corneas. The highest sensitivity (79.2%) was obtained for both AC depth and CH (cutoff points 3.22 mm and 9.39 mmHg respectively). The best specificity (89.5%) and test accuracy (80.34%) were obtained for CA (cutoff point of 2.2 D). CONCLUSION: When considered together, studied parameters showed statistical differences between groups. However, when considered independently they presented low sensitivity, specificity and test accuracy in differentiating keratoconus from healthy corneas.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, and test accuracy of corneal biomechanical metrics and anterior segment data in differentiating keratoconus from healthy corneas. METHODS: Comparative case series. Patients with and without keratoconus (gender and age-matched) were submitted for complete eye examinations including corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) as measured by the Ocular Response Analyzer and anterior segment data as gathered through Pentacam assessments. The anterior segment data measurement included average central keratometric readings (K-Ave), corneal astigmatism (CA), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (AC depth) and corneal volume (CV). All parameters were assessed, compared and analyzed. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to identify the best cutoff point by which to maximize the sensitivity and specificity of discriminating keratoconus from normal corneas for each data category. RESULTS: Seventy seven eyes from forty three patients (24 male, 19 female) with keratoconus and eighty six eyes from forty three (24 male, 19 female) healthy controls were enrolled. ROC curve analysis showed poor overall predictive accuracy for all studied parameters in differentiating keratoconus from normal corneas. The highest sensitivity (79.2%) was obtained for both AC depth and CH (cutoff points 3.22 mm and 9.39 mmHg respectively). The best specificity (89.5%) and test accuracy (80.34%) were obtained for CA (cutoff point of 2.2 D). CONCLUSION: When considered together, studied parameters showed statistical differences between groups. However, when considered independently they presented low sensitivity, specificity and test accuracy in differentiating keratoconus from healthy corneas.
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: 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
Authors: Thao N Yeh; Harry M Green; Yixiu Zhou; Julie Pitts; Britney Kitamata-Wong; Sophia Lee; Shiyin L Wang; Meng C Lin Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2013-06-06 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Renato Ambrósio; Fernando Faria Correia; Bernardo Lopes; Marcella Q Salomão; Allan Luz; Daniel G Dawson; Ahmed Elsheikh; Riccardo Vinciguerra; Paolo Vinciguerra; Cynthia J Roberts Journal: Open Ophthalmol J Date: 2017-07-31
Authors: Majid Moshirfar; Mahsaw N Motlagh; Michael S Murri; Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam; Yasmyne C Ronquillo; Phillip C Hoopes Journal: Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol Date: 2019
Authors: Nery Garcia-Porta; Paulo Fernandes; Antonio Queiros; Jose Salgado-Borges; Manuel Parafita-Mato; Jose Manuel González-Méijome Journal: ISRN Ophthalmol Date: 2014-03-04