Literature DB >> 22281864

A new, pachymetry-based approach for diagnostic cutoffs for normal, suspect and keratoconic cornea.

G Prakash1, A Agarwal, A I Mazhari, G Kumar, P Desai, D A Kumar, S Jacob, A Agarwal.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To analyze whether an association exists between keratometric and pachymetric changes in the cornea, and whether it can be used to create pachymetric cutoff criteria secondary to keratometric criteria.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 1000 candidates presenting to the refractive surgery services of a tertiary care hospital underwent bilateral Orbscan IIz (Bausch and Lomb) assessment along with other ophthalmic evaluation.
RESULTS: Stepwise regression analysis-based models showed that simulated keratometry (simK) astigmatism was significantly predicted by the minimum corneal thickness (MCT) and difference between central and MCT (δCT), mean SimK by the MCT and δCT, and maximum keratometry in the central 10-mm zone by the MCT and δCT (P<0.001). The mean MCT values were 542.5 ± 39.6, 539.9 ± 39.2, 524.2 ± 49.5, and 449.3 ± 73.7 μm for flatter normal (<44 D), steeper normal (≥ 44 D), keratoconus suspect and keratoconic eyes, respectively (P<0.001). The mean differences between central corneal thickness and MCT (δCT) were 12.2 ± 7.1 μm, 12.4 ± 7.4 μm, 14.4 ± 8.9 μm and 23.2 ± 10.1 μm for the flatter normal, steeper normal, keratoconus suspect, and keratoconic eyes, respectively (P<0.001). Mean and 2SD cutoff were used to suggest that a cornea having MCT< 461 μm or δCT>27 μm has only a 2.5% chance of being normal and not a keratoconus suspect or worse.
CONCLUSION: Pachymetric diagnostic cutoffs can be used as adjuncts to the existing topographic criteria to screen keratoconus suspect and keratoconic eyes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22281864      PMCID: PMC3351046          DOI: 10.1038/eye.2011.365

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eye (Lond)        ISSN: 0950-222X            Impact factor:   3.775


  14 in total

1.  A new method for grading the severity of keratoconus: the Keratoconus Severity Score (KSS).

Authors:  Timothy T McMahon; Loretta Szczotka-Flynn; Joseph T Barr; Robert J Anderson; Mary E Slaughter; Jonathan H Lass; Sudha K Iyengar
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.651

2.  Corneal biomechanics, refraction, and corneal aberrometry in keratoconus: an integrated study.

Authors:  David P Piñero; Jorge L Alio; Rafael I Barraquer; Ralph Michael; Ramón Jiménez
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2009-11-11       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  Evaluation of mild, moderate, and advanced keratoconus using ultrasound pachometry and the EyeSys videokeratoscope.

Authors:  G A Watters; H Owens
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 1.973

Review 4.  Keratoconus.

Authors:  Y S Rabinowitz
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  1998 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 6.048

5.  Current keratoconus detection methods compared with a neural network approach.

Authors:  M K Smolek; S D Klyce
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 4.799

6.  Accuracy of ultrasonic pachymetry and videokeratography in detecting keratoconus.

Authors:  Y S Rabinowitz; K Rasheed; H Yang; J Elashoff
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 3.351

7.  KISA% index: a quantitative videokeratography algorithm embodying minimal topographic criteria for diagnosing keratoconus.

Authors:  Y S Rabinowitz; K Rasheed
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 3.351

8.  Keratoconus diagnosis with optical coherence tomography pachymetry mapping.

Authors:  Yan Li; David M Meisler; Maolong Tang; Ake T H Lu; Vishakha Thakrar; Bibiana J Reiser; David Huang
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2008-11-05       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Corneal higher order aberrations: a method to grade keratoconus.

Authors:  Jorge L Alió; Mohamed H Shabayek
Journal:  J Refract Surg       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.573

10.  A quantitative corneal topography index for detection of keratoconus.

Authors:  M H Dastjerdi; H Hashemi
Journal:  J Refract Surg       Date:  1998 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.573

View more
  6 in total

1.  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

2.  Evaluation of intereye corneal asymmetry in patients with keratoconus. A scheimpflug imaging study.

Authors:  Lóránt Dienes; Kinga Kránitz; Eva Juhász; Andrea Gyenes; Agnes Takács; Kata Miháltz; Zoltán Z Nagy; Illés Kovács
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-08       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Morphogeometric analysis for characterization of keratoconus considering the spatial localization and projection of apex and minimum corneal thickness point.

Authors:  Jose S Velázquez; Francisco Cavas; David P Piñero; Francisco J F Cañavate; Jorge Alio Del Barrio; Jorge L Alio
Journal:  J Adv Res       Date:  2020-03-30       Impact factor: 10.479

4.  Comparison of corneal elevation and pachymetry measurements made by two state of the art corneal tomographers with different measurement principles.

Authors:  Simon Schröder; Achim Langenbucher; Jens Schrecker
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-16       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  A new approach to keratoconus detection based on corneal morphogeometric analysis.

Authors:  Francisco Cavas-Martínez; Laurent Bataille; Daniel G Fernández-Pacheco; Francisco J F Cañavate; Jorge L Alió
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-08       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Keratoconus detection of changes using deep learning of colour-coded maps.

Authors:  Xu Chen; Jiaxin Zhao; Katja C Iselin; Davide Borroni; Davide Romano; Akilesh Gokul; Charles N J McGhee; Yitian Zhao; Mohammad-Reza Sedaghat; Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam; Mohammed Ziaei; Stephen Kaye; Vito Romano; Yalin Zheng
Journal:  BMJ Open Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-07-13
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.