Literature DB >> 21596255

Evaluation of Scheimpflug imaging parameters in subclinical keratoconus, keratoconus, and normal eyes.

Ömür Ö Uçakhan1, Volkan Cetinkor, Muhip Özkan, Ayfer Kanpolat.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of different Scheimpflug-imaging parameters in discriminating between subclinical keratoconus, keratoconus eyes, and normal eyes.
SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey.
DESIGN: Comparative case series.
METHODS: Pentacam Scheimpflug measurements were taken in eyes with mild to moderate keratoconus, subclinical keratoconus, or with myopic astigmatism (normal eyes). Several parameters provided by the software or derived from the elevation maps were evaluated and compared between the groups. The Mann-Whitney test, receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curves, and logistic regression analysis were used to compare the mean measurements and to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the parameters or constructed models.
RESULTS: The corneal power and elevation measurements were statistically significantly higher and the cornea was significantly thinner in eyes with subclinical or clinical keratoconus than in normal eyes (P < .05). The ROC curve analysis showed high overall predictive accuracy of various elevation and thickness indices in discriminating ectatic corneas from normal corneas. Logistic regression analysis showed that the goodness of fit of a model using a combination of corneal power, thickness, and anterior elevation parameters was best in discriminating keratoconus eyes from normal eyes, whereas that of a model using a combination of corneal power, thickness, and posterior elevation was best in discriminating subclinical keratoconus eyes from normal eyes.
CONCLUSION: Combined analysis of anterior and posterior corneal power, elevation, and thickness data provided by the Scheimpflug device effectively discriminated between ectatic corneas and normal corneas. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
Copyright © 2011 ASCRS and ESCRS. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21596255     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.12.049

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg        ISSN: 0886-3350            Impact factor:   3.351


  50 in total

1.  Clinical utility of ocular residual astigmatism and topographic disparity vector indexes in subclinical and clinical keratoconus.

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

2.  Correlation of basic indicators with stages of keratoconus assessed by Pentacam tomography.

Authors:  Xian-Li Du; Min Chen; Li-Xin Xie
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  Evaluation of topographic, tomographic, topometric, densitometric, and aberrometric features of cornea with pentacam HR system in subclinical keratoconus.

Authors:  Haci Hasan Ozkan; Mustafa Koc; Hasan Kiziltoprak; Kemal Tekin; Emre Aydemir
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-03-27       Impact factor: 2.031

4.  Corneal thickness and volume in subclinical and clinical keratoconus.

Authors:  Seyed Mahdi Ahmadi Hosseini; Norhani Mohidin; Fereshteh Abolbashari; Bariah Mohd-Ali; Chandramalar T Santhirathelagan
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-11-09       Impact factor: 2.031

5.  Comparative analysis of the relationship between anterior and posterior corneal shape analyzed by Scheimpflug photography in normal and keratoconus eyes.

Authors:  Raúl Montalbán; Jorge L Alio; Jaime Javaloy; David P Piñero
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-01-20       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Enhanced Combined Tomography and Biomechanics Data for Distinguishing Forme Fruste Keratoconus.

Authors:  Allan Luz; Bernardo Lopes; Katie M Hallahan; Bruno Valbon; Isaac Ramos; Fernando Faria-Correia; Paulo Schor; William J Dupps; Renato Ambrósio
Journal:  J Refract Surg       Date:  2016-07-01       Impact factor: 3.573

7.  Epithelial remodeling as basis for machine-based identification of keratoconus.

Authors:  Ronald H Silverman; Raksha Urs; Arindam Roychoudhury; Timothy J Archer; Marine Gobbe; Dan Z Reinstein
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 4.799

8.  Comparison between corneal elevation maps using different reference surfaces with Scheimpflug-Placido topographer.

Authors:  Engy Mohamed Mostafa
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-07-28       Impact factor: 2.031

9.  A statistical approach to classification of keratoconus.

Authors:  Murat Ucar; Hasan Basri Cakmak; Baha Sen
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-09-18       Impact factor: 1.779

10.  Factors associated with changes in posterior corneal surface following photorefractive keratectomy.

Authors:  Achia Nemet; Michael Mimouni; Igor Vainer; Tzahi Sela; Igor Kaiserman
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-06-07       Impact factor: 3.117

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.