Matthew T Feng1, Joan T Kim, Renato Ambrósio, Michael W Belin, Satinder P S Grewal, Wang Yan, Mohamed Shafik Shaheen, Charlotte A Jordan, Charles McGhee, Naoyuki Maeda, Tobias H Neuhann, H Burkhard Dick, Andreas Steinmueller. 1. From the *Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ; †Instituto de Olhos Renato Ambrósio, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; ‡Grewal Eye Institute, Chandigarh, India; §Tianjin Eye Hospital and Eye Institute, Key Laboratory in Vision and Ophthalmology, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China; ¶Department of Ophthalmology, University of Alexandria, Alexandria, Egypt; ||Department of Ophthalmology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand; **Department of Ophthalmology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Osaka, Japan; and ††AaM Augenklinik Marienplatz Munich, Munich; ‡‡Center for Vision Science, Ruhr University Eye Hospital, Bochum; and §§OCULUS Optikgeraete GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In corneal refractive surgery, postoperative ectasia risk assessment routinely includes pachymetric analysis at the apex and thinnest point. We examined whether these data differ worldwide and constructed preliminary country-specific normative thresholds. DESIGN: This was a multicenter, cross-sectional study. METHODS: Using the Pentacam Eye Scanner (OCULUS GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany), we examined 1 randomly selected eye from each of 555 normal adults (8 countries, 6 continents), measuring the thinnest point location, central pachymetry (thinnest point, pupillary center, and apex), and the apex-thinnest point difference. International differences were assessed by 1-way analysis of variance. Normative thresholds were defined by 2- and 3-SD gates or Tukey method. RESULTS: The thinnest point averaged 0.44 mm temporal and 0.29 mm inferior to the apex. Individual thinnest points located more than 1.0 mm inferior represented fewer than 0.5% of normal corneas (>0.76 mm in the US subgroup). The mean thinnest-point pachymetry was 536 μm overall, and values less than 469 or 435 μm (-2 or -3 SD, respectively) would be expected in less than 2.5% or 0.15% of normal corneas, respectively. The thinnest-point pachymetry averaged 2 to 3 μm thinner than apical (range, 0-32 μm). Differences of greater than 8.5 μm would be expected in less than 0.5% of normal corneas overall. CONCLUSIONS: International differences were largely clinically insignificant. Nevertheless, it remains preferable to establish racial/geographic-specific normative values. We defined preliminary generalized and country-specific thresholds useful to the corneal refractive surgeon for identifying potentially abnormal corneas based on common pachymetric parameters, particularly the thinnest point by tomography.
PURPOSE: In corneal refractive surgery, postoperative ectasia risk assessment routinely includes pachymetric analysis at the apex and thinnest point. We examined whether these data differ worldwide and constructed preliminary country-specific normative thresholds. DESIGN: This was a multicenter, cross-sectional study. METHODS: Using the Pentacam Eye Scanner (OCULUS GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany), we examined 1 randomly selected eye from each of 555 normal adults (8 countries, 6 continents), measuring the thinnest point location, central pachymetry (thinnest point, pupillary center, and apex), and the apex-thinnest point difference. International differences were assessed by 1-way analysis of variance. Normative thresholds were defined by 2- and 3-SD gates or Tukey method. RESULTS: The thinnest point averaged 0.44 mm temporal and 0.29 mm inferior to the apex. Individual thinnest points located more than 1.0 mm inferior represented fewer than 0.5% of normal corneas (>0.76 mm in the US subgroup). The mean thinnest-point pachymetry was 536 μm overall, and values less than 469 or 435 μm (-2 or -3 SD, respectively) would be expected in less than 2.5% or 0.15% of normal corneas, respectively. The thinnest-point pachymetry averaged 2 to 3 μm thinner than apical (range, 0-32 μm). Differences of greater than 8.5 μm would be expected in less than 0.5% of normal corneas overall. CONCLUSIONS: International differences were largely clinically insignificant. Nevertheless, it remains preferable to establish racial/geographic-specific normative values. We defined preliminary generalized and country-specific thresholds useful to the corneal refractive surgeon for identifying potentially abnormal corneas based on common pachymetric parameters, particularly the thinnest point by tomography.