Literature DB >> 24218039

Meta-analysis of Pentacam vs. ultrasound pachymetry in central corneal thickness measurement in normal, post-LASIK or PRK, and keratoconic or keratoconus-suspect eyes.

Wenjing Wu1, Yan Wang, Lulu Xu.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the central corneal thickness (CCT) measurement differences between Pentacam (Oculus Inc., Germany) and Ultrasound Pachymetry (USP) in normal (unoperated eyes , myopic and astigmatic eyes without corneal disease or topographic irregularity), after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) or photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), and keratoconic or keratoconus suspected eyes. We assess whether Pentacam and USP have similar CCT differences in normal, thinner corneas after LASIK or PRK procedures, and kerotoconic or keratoconus suspected eyes.
METHODS: Data sources, including PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials on the Cochrane Library, were searched to find the relevant studies. Primary outcome measures were CCT measurement between Pentacam and USP. Three groups of eyes were analyzed: normal; LASIK or PRK eyes; and keratoconus suspected or keratoconic eyes.
RESULTS: Nineteen studies describing 1,908 eyes were enrolled in the normal group. Pentacam results were 1.47 μm ,95 % confidence interval (CI) -2.32 to 5.27, higher than USP without statistically significant difference (P = 0.45). Nine studies with total 539 eyes were included in the corneas after LASIK or PRK. The mean difference in the CCT measurement with Pentacam and ultrasound pachymetry was 1.03 μm, with the 95 % CI -3.36 to 5.42, there was no statistically difference (P = 0.64). Four studies with a total of 185 eyes were included in the keratoconic eyes or keratoconus-suspect group, however,the mean difference was -6.33 μm (95 % CI -9.17 to-3.49), which was statistically different between Pentacam and ultrasound pachymetry in the CCT measurement (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Pentacam offers similar CCT results to ultrasound pachymetry in normal eyes, thinner corneas after LASIK or PRK procedures. However, in keratoconic or keratoconus-suspect eyes, Pentacam slightly underestimates the central corneal thickness than does ultrasound pachymetry, which may result from the difficulty in fixation of keratoconic eyes, misalignment of Pentacam and the variation of ultrasonic velocity due to the histological deformation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24218039     DOI: 10.1007/s00417-013-2502-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0721-832X            Impact factor:   3.117


  49 in total

1.  Corneal thickness measurement using Orbscan, Pentacam, Galilei, and ultrasound in normal and post-femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis eyes.

Authors:  Se-Hoon Park; Suk-Kyue Choi; Doh Lee; Eun-Jung Jun; Jin-Hyoung Kim
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.651

2.  Reliability of the corneal thickness measurements with the Pentacam HR imaging system and ultrasound pachymetry.

Authors:  László Módis; Eszter Szalai; Gábor Németh; András Berta
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 2.651

3.  Corneal thickness measurements in normal and keratoconic eyes: Pentacam comprehensive eye scanner versus noncontact specular microscopy and ultrasound pachymetry.

Authors:  Omür Ozlenen Uçakhan; Muhip Ozkan; Ayfer Kanpolat
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.351

4.  Central corneal thickness measurements using Orbscan II, Visante, ultrasound, and Pentacam pachymetry after laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia.

Authors:  Thomas Ho; Arthur C K Cheng; Srinivas K Rao; Silvania Lau; Chris K S Leung; Dennis S C Lam
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.351

5.  A clinical comparison of optical and ultrasonic pachometry.

Authors:  J Nissen; J O Hjortdal; N Ehlers; K Frost-Larsen; T Sørensen
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh)       Date:  1991-10

6.  Correlation of central and peripheral corneal thickness in healthy corneas.

Authors:  Usama Fares; Ahmad Muneer Otri; Mouhamed Ali Al-Aqaba; Harminder S Dua
Journal:  Cont Lens Anterior Eye       Date:  2011-08-31       Impact factor: 3.077

7.  Comparison of corneal thickness measurement with the Pentacam, the PARK1 and an ultrasonic pachymeter.

Authors:  Hassan Hashemi; Ebrahim Jafarzadehpur; Shiva Mehravaran; Farhad Rezvan; Sara Bigdeli
Journal:  Clin Exp Optom       Date:  2011-01-24       Impact factor: 2.742

8.  Central corneal thickness measurements obtained with anterior segment spectral domain optical coherence tomography compared to ultrasound pachymetry in healthy subjects.

Authors:  Lori Vollmer; Joseph Sowka; Joseph Pizzimenti; Xinha Yu
Journal:  Optometry       Date:  2012-05-31

9.  Comparison of artemis 2 ultrasound and Visante optical coherence tomography corneal thickness profiles.

Authors:  Roxana Ursea; Matthew Feng; Raksha Urs; Arindam RoyChoudhury; Ronald H Silverman
Journal:  J Refract Surg       Date:  2012-11-30       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 10.  Evidence for superior efficacy and safety of LASIK over photorefractive keratectomy for correction of myopia.

Authors:  Alex J Shortt; Catey Bunce; Bruce D S Allan
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 12.079

View more
  10 in total

1.  Central corneal thickness determination in corneal edema using ultrasound pachymetry, a Scheimpflug camera, and anterior segment OCT.

Authors:  David Kuerten; Niklas Plange; Eva Charlotte Koch; Antonis Koutsonas; Peter Walter; Matthias Fuest
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Comparison of corneal measurements in keratoconic eyes using rotating Scheimpflug camera and scanning-slit topography.

Authors:  Mohammad Naderan; Saeed Shoar; Morteza Naderan; Mohammad Amin Kamaleddin; Mohammad Taher Rajabi
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-04-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  Author reply: central corneal thickness determination in corneal edema.

Authors:  D Kuerten; N Plange; P Walter; M Fuest
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-03-22       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  Comparison of objective and subjective refractive surgery screening parameters between regular and high-resolution Scheimpflug imaging devices.

Authors:  J Bradley Randleman; Jihan Akhtar; Michael J Lynn; Renato Ambrósio; William J Dupps; Ronald R Krueger; Stephen D Klyce
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2014-12-20       Impact factor: 3.351

5.  Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements in corneal edema using ultrasound pachymetry, Visante anterior-segment optical coherence tomography, Cirrus optical coherence tomography, and Pentacam Scheimpflug camera tomography.

Authors:  Nida Wongchaisuwat; Ankana Metheetrairat; Pratuangsri Chonpimai; Waree Nujoi; Pinnita Prabhasawat
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-09-25

6.  Sirius Scheimpflug-Placido versus ultrasound pachymetry for central corneal thickness: meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yili Jin; Colm McAlinden; Yong Sun; Daizong Wen; Yiran Wang; Jinjin Yu; Ke Feng; Benhao Song; Qinmei Wang; Shihao Chen; Jinhai Huang
Journal:  Eye Vis (Lond)       Date:  2021-02-18

7.  The short-term effects of wearing swimming goggles on corneal biomechanics.

Authors:  Raimundo Jiménez; Rubén Molina; Jesús Vera; Beatriz Redondo
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-04-04       Impact factor: 2.029

8.  Distribution Pattern of Total Corneal Thickness in Keratoconus versus Normal Eyes Using an Optical Coherence Tomography.

Authors:  Hassan Hashemi; Zahra Heidari; Mehrdad Mohammadpour; Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam; Mehdi Khabazkhoob
Journal:  J Curr Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-07-26

Review 9.  Bilateral symmetry in vision and influence of ocular surgical procedures on binocular vision: A topical review.

Authors:  Samuel Arba Mosquera; Shwetabh Verma
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2016-03-16

10.  Changes in Corneal Volume at Different Areas and Its Correlation with Corneal Biomechanics after SMILE and FS-LASIK Surgery.

Authors:  Pinghui Wei; George Pm Cheng; Jiamei Zhang; Alex Lk Ng; Tommy Cy Chan; Vishal Jhanji; Yan Wang
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 1.909

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.