PURPOSE: To analyze the potential benefit of the newly developed Tomography and Biomechanical Index (TBI) for early keratoconus screening. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the discriminatory power of the corneal tomography Belin/Ambrósio Enhanced Ectasia Display (BAD-D) index and the newly developed Corvis Biomechanical Index (CBI) and TBI to differentiate between normal eyes, manifest keratoconus eyes (KCE), very asymmetric keratoconus eyes with ectasia (VAE-E), and their fellow eyes with either regular topography (VAE-NT) or regular topography and tomography (VAE-NTT) were analyzed by applying the t test (for normal distribution), Wilcoxon matched-pairs test (if not normally distributed), and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). The DeLong test was used to compare the area under the ROC (AUROC). Further, the cut-offs of the analyzed indices presented in a study by Ambrósio et al. from 2017 were applied in the study population to enable a cross-validation in an independent study population. RESULTS: All indices demonstrated a high discriminative power when comparing normal and advanced keratoconus, which decreased when comparing normal and VAE-NT eyes and further when analyzing normal versus VAE-NTT eyes. The difference between the AUROCs reached a statistically significant level when comparing TBI versus BAD-D analyzing normal versus all included keratoconic eyes (P = .02). The TBI presented with the highest AUROCs throughout all conducted analyses when comparing different keratoconus stages, although not reaching a statistically significant level. Applying the cut-offs presented by Ambrósio et al. to differentiate between normal and VAE-NT in the study population, the accuracy was reproducible (accuracy in our study population with an optimized TBI cut-off: 0.72, with the cut-off defined by Ambrósio et al. 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: The TBI enables karatoconus screening in topographical and tomographical regular keratoconic eyes. To further improve the screening accuray, prospective studies should be conducted. [J Refract Surg. 2018;34(12):840-847.]. Copyright 2018, SLACK Incorporated.
PURPOSE: To analyze the potential benefit of the newly developed Tomography and Biomechanical Index (TBI) for early keratoconus screening. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the discriminatory power of the corneal tomography Belin/Ambrósio Enhanced Ectasia Display (BAD-D) index and the newly developed Corvis Biomechanical Index (CBI) and TBI to differentiate between normal eyes, manifest keratoconus eyes (KCE), very asymmetric keratoconus eyes with ectasia (VAE-E), and their fellow eyes with either regular topography (VAE-NT) or regular topography and tomography (VAE-NTT) were analyzed by applying the t test (for normal distribution), Wilcoxon matched-pairs test (if not normally distributed), and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). The DeLong test was used to compare the area under the ROC (AUROC). Further, the cut-offs of the analyzed indices presented in a study by Ambrósio et al. from 2017 were applied in the study population to enable a cross-validation in an independent study population. RESULTS: All indices demonstrated a high discriminative power when comparing normal and advanced keratoconus, which decreased when comparing normal and VAE-NT eyes and further when analyzing normal versus VAE-NTT eyes. The difference between the AUROCs reached a statistically significant level when comparing TBI versus BAD-D analyzing normal versus all included keratoconic eyes (P = .02). The TBI presented with the highest AUROCs throughout all conducted analyses when comparing different keratoconus stages, although not reaching a statistically significant level. Applying the cut-offs presented by Ambrósio et al. to differentiate between normal and VAE-NT in the study population, the accuracy was reproducible (accuracy in our study population with an optimized TBI cut-off: 0.72, with the cut-off defined by Ambrósio et al. 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: The TBI enables karatoconus screening in topographical and tomographical regular keratoconic eyes. To further improve the screening accuray, prospective studies should be conducted. [J Refract Surg. 2018;34(12):840-847.]. Copyright 2018, SLACK Incorporated.
Authors: Shengsheng Wei; Jing Li; Yong Li; Yaohua Zhang; Yan Cai; Jing Du; Jianguo Liu; Yan Wang Journal: Int Ophthalmol Date: 2022-09-24 Impact factor: 2.029
Authors: Cristina Peris-Martínez; María Amparo Díez-Ajenjo; María Carmen García-Domene; María Dolores Pinazo-Durán; María José Luque-Cobija; María Ángeles Del Buey-Sayas; Susana Ortí-Navarro Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-04-28 Impact factor: 4.241
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
Authors: Louise Pellegrino Gomes Esporcatte; Marcella Q Salomão; Bernardo T Lopes; Paolo Vinciguerra; Riccardo Vinciguerra; Cynthia Roberts; Ahmed Elsheikh; Daniel G Dawson; Renato Ambrósio Journal: Eye Vis (Lond) Date: 2020-02-05