Literature DB >> 29847493

Diagnostic Ability of Corneal Shape and Biomechanical Parameters for Detecting Frank Keratoconus.

Mohammad-Reza Sedaghat1, Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam2, Renato Ambrósio3,4,5, Hamid-Reza Heidari2, Nasim Maddah2, Zeynab Danesh2, Fatemeh Sabzi1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the diagnostic capability of corneal shape and biomechanical parameters for distinguishing normal eyes from frank keratoconus (KCN).
METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of eyes of 137 control subjects and 145 patients with KCN, with one of their eyes randomly selected as the study eye. Corneal biomechanical parameters were assessed using the Corvis ST (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH) and Oculus Response Analyzer (Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments). Corneal tomography was performed using the Oculus Pentacam. The clinical diagnosis of KCN was based on slit-lamp findings (eg, Fleischer ring, Vogt striae) and abnormal topographic patterns on the sagittal (axial) front curvature map, disregarding tomographic and biomechanical findings. The discriminative ability for each parameter was tested using the Mann-Whitney U test. The accuracy of each parameter with statistically significant differences was determined using receiver operating characteristic curves, which were compared using the DeLong method.
RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed for all corneal shape and biomechanical parameters tested (P < 0.05) except peak distance at the highest concavity (P = 0.504). The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity for corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) were 0.894, 80.7%, and 84.7% and 0.946, 85.5%, and 89.1%, respectively. The dynamic corneal response parameters from the Corvis ST, stiffness parameter at first applanation, integrated radius (IR), and deformation amplitude ratio at 2 mm (DA-2 mm) had AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.965, 86.2%, and 94.9%; 0.961, 87.6%, and 93.4%; and 0.950, 80.7%, and 98.5%. The Corvis biomechanical index had an AUC of 0.998 (95% confidence interval, 0.983-1.000), with 96.6% sensitivity and 99.3% specificity. The Belin-Ambrósio enhanced ectasia deviation index (BAD-Dv3) and the tomographical/biomechanical index (TBI) had an AUC of 1.0 (95% confidence interval, 0.987-1.000), with sensitivity and specificity of 100%. The combined indices, Corvis biomechanical index, BAD-D, and TBI, had a statistically higher AUC than that of all corneal biomechanical parameters (DeLong, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The Scheimpflug-derived shape and biomechanical parameters are able to accurately distinguish normal corneas from frank (clinical) keratoconic corneas. However, the combined parameters were more effective. Further studies should test milder ectasia cases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29847493     DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000001639

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cornea        ISSN: 0277-3740            Impact factor:   2.651


  24 in total

1.  Evaluation of Corvis ST tonometer with the updated software in glaucoma practice.

Authors:  Ioannis Halkiadakis; Vasilios Tzimis; Alexandros Gryparis; Ioannis Markopoulos; Vasiliki Konstadinidou; Elias Zintzaras; Michalis Tzakos
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-03-18       Impact factor: 1.779

2.  Best indices of dual Scheimpflug/Placido tomographer for keratoconus detection.

Authors:  Zahra Heidari; Ebrahim Jafarzadehpour; Mehrdad Mohammadpour; Hassan Hashemi
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-09-23       Impact factor: 2.029

3.  Detection ability of corneal biomechanical parameters for early diagnosis of ectasia.

Authors:  Mohammad-Reza Sedaghat; Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam; Javad Heravian; Atiyeh Ansari; Helia Shayanfar; Majid Moshirfar
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2022-08-29       Impact factor: 4.456

4.  Performances of Corneal Topography and Tomography in the Diagnosis of Subclinical and Clinical Keratoconus.

Authors:  Cristina Ariadna Nicula; Adriana Elena Bulboacă; Dorin Nicula; Ariadna Patricia Nicula; Karin Ursula Horvath; Sorana D Bolboacă
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-05-26

Review 5.  Corneal biomechanics: Measurement and structural correlations.

Authors:  Jillian Chong; William J Dupps
Journal:  Exp Eye Res       Date:  2021-02-18       Impact factor: 3.467

6.  Twenty-four hours intraocular pressure in keratoconic eyes assessed by applanation tonometry and Tono-Pen AVIA.

Authors:  Rafael Vidal Merola; Sebastião Cronemberger; Artur William Veloso; Alberto Diniz-Filho
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-01-18       Impact factor: 1.779

7.  Diagnostic Sensitivity of Different Reference Bodies When Using Scheimpflug Tomography in a Myopic Population with Keratoconus.

Authors:  Daniel Garcerant; Ignacio Jiménez-Alfaro; Nicolás Alejandre
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-07-18       Impact factor: 1.909

Review 8.  Advances in Biomechanical Parameters for Screening of Refractive Surgery Candidates: A Review of the Literature, Part III.

Authors:  Majid Moshirfar; Mahsaw N Motlagh; Michael S Murri; Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam; Yasmyne C Ronquillo; Phillip C Hoopes
Journal:  Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol       Date:  2019

Review 9.  Pentacam® Corneal Tomography for Screening of Refractive Surgery Candidates: A Review of the Literature, Part I.

Authors:  Mahsaw N Motlagh; Majid Moshirfar; Michael S Murri; David F Skanchy; Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam; Yasmyne C Ronquillo; Phillip C Hoopes
Journal:  Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol       Date:  2019

10.  Evaluation of new Corvis ST parameters in normal, Post-LASIK, Post-LASIK keratectasia and keratoconus eyes.

Authors:  Kaili Yang; Liyan Xu; Qi Fan; Yuwei Gu; Peng Song; Bo Zhang; Dongqing Zhao; Chenjiu Pang; Shengwei Ren
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-03-30       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.