Literature DB >> 26682162

In-vivo corneal biomechanical analysis of unilateral keratoconus.

Orhan Ayar1, Mehmet Cuneyt Ozmen2, Orkun Muftuoglu3, Mehmet Orcun Akdemir1, Mustafa Koc4, Kemal Ozulken5.   

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate and compare corneal biomechanical findings measured by ocular response analyzer, topographic and pachymetric findings in patients with unilateral keratoconus patients and healthy controls.
METHODS: This is an observational, case-control study. Patients with keratoconus in one eye and forme fruste keratoconus in the fellow eye were compared with sex and age matched with controls healthy subjects. All subjects were evaluated with rotating scheimpflug imaging system. The receiver-operating-characteristic curves were analyzed to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the parameters.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients with keratoconus in one eye and forme fruste keratoconus in the fellow eye were compared with 40 eyes of 40 normal subjects. Corneal hysteresis (CH) was 8.0±1.7 mm Hg in keratoconus group, 8.3±1.6 mm Hg in forme fruste keratoconus group, and 9.8±1.6 mm Hg in control groups (P=0.54 between keratoconus and forme fruste keratoconus groups, P<0.01 between control group and other groups). Corneal resistance factor (CRF) was 7.1±2.2 mm Hg in keratoconus group, 7.8±1.2 mm Hg in forme fruste keratoconus group and 9.9±1.5 mm Hg in control group (P<0.001 between control group and other groups). Using receiver-operating-characteristic analysis, the area under curve values of the parameters to distinguish forme fruste keratoconus from control subjects were: CH (0.768), CRF (0.866). Best cut-off points were 9.3 mm Hg and 8.8 mm Hg for CH and CRF respectively.
CONCLUSION: Ocular response analyzer parameters (CH and CRF) are found to be significantly lower in forme fruste keratoconus patients compared to normal control subjects.

Entities:  

Keywords:  forme fruste keratoconus; keratoconus; ocular response analyzer

Year:  2015        PMID: 26682162      PMCID: PMC4651878          DOI: 10.3980/j.issn.2222-3959.2015.06.11

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 2222-3959            Impact factor:   1.779


  24 in total

1.  Topographic and tomographic properties of forme fruste keratoconus corneas.

Authors:  Alain Saad; Damien Gatinel
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2010-06-16       Impact factor: 4.799

2.  Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer.

Authors:  David A Luce
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.351

3.  Diurnal variation of ocular hysteresis in normal subjects: relevance in clinical context.

Authors:  Mohammad Laiquzzaman; Rajan Bhojwani; Ian Cunliffe; Sunil Shah
Journal:  Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.207

4.  Corneal-thickness spatial profile and corneal-volume distribution: tomographic indices to detect keratoconus.

Authors:  Renato Ambrósio; Ruiz Simonato Alonso; Allan Luz; Luis Guillermo Coca Velarde
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.351

5.  Corneal biomechanical properties in normal, post-laser in situ keratomileusis, and keratoconic eyes.

Authors:  Dolores Ortiz; David Piñero; Mohamed H Shabayek; Francisco Arnalich-Montiel; Jorge L Alió
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 3.351

6.  Unilateral keratoconus. Incidence and quantitative topographic analysis.

Authors:  D R Holland; N Maeda; S B Hannush; L H Riveroll; M T Green; S D Klyce; S E Wilson
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 12.079

7.  Corneal ectasia induced by laser in situ keratomileusis.

Authors:  I G Pallikaris; G D Kymionis; N I Astyrakakis
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 3.351

8.  Corneal biomechanical metrics and anterior segment parameters in mild keratoconus.

Authors:  Bruno M Fontes; Renato Ambrósio; Daniela Jardim; Guillermo C Velarde; Walton Nosé
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Videokeratography of the fellow eye in unilateral keratoconus.

Authors:  Y S Rabinowitz; A B Nesburn; P J McDonnell
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 12.079

10.  Assessment of the biomechanical properties of the cornea with the ocular response analyzer in normal and keratoconic eyes.

Authors:  Sunil Shah; Mohammed Laiquzzaman; Rajan Bhojwani; Sanjay Mantry; Ian Cunliffe
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 4.799

View more
  4 in total

1.  A case of unilateral circumscribed posterior keratoconus evaluated by three different imaging tools: optical coherence tomography, videokeratography, and Scheimpflug corneal tomography.

Authors:  Leopoldo Spadea; Giorgia Maraone; Carlo Cagini
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-05-13       Impact factor: 2.031

2.  Determine Corneal Biomechanical Parameters by Finite Element Simulation and Parametric Analysis Based on ORA Measurements.

Authors:  Xiao Qin; Lei Tian; Hui Zhang; Di Zhang; Ying Jie; Hai-Xia Zhang; Lin Li
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-04-13

Review 3.  Mechanisms of Collagen Crosslinking in Diabetes and Keratoconus.

Authors:  Tina B McKay; Shrestha Priyadarsini; Dimitrios Karamichos
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2019-10-11       Impact factor: 6.600

4.  A Potential Screening Index of Corneal Biomechanics in Healthy Subjects, Forme Fruste Keratoconus Patients and Clinical Keratoconus Patients.

Authors:  Lei Tian; Xiao Qin; Hui Zhang; Di Zhang; Li-Li Guo; Hai-Xia Zhang; Ying Wu; Ying Jie; Lin Li
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2021-12-23
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.