Literature DB >> 30984982

Biomechanical Analysis of Subclinical Keratoconus With Normal Topographic, Topometric, and Tomographic Findings.

Mustafa Koc, Emre Aydemir, Kemal Tekin, Merve Inanc, Pinar Kosekahya, Hasan Kiziltoprak.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate the corneal biomechanical responses of subclinical keratoconus with normal topographic, topometric, and tomographic findings.
METHODS: In this prospective observational study, the study group was selected from patients with clinically evident keratoconus in one eye and subclinical keratoconus with normal topographic, topometric, and tomographic findings in the fellow eye. The control group was selected from candidates for contact lens use. The biomechanical analyses were performed using the Corvis ST (Oculus Optikgeräte, Wetzlar, Germany). The following parameters were analyzed: A1 velocity, A2 velocity, A1 length, A2 length, deformation amplitude ratio, stiffness parameter at the first applanation, Corvis Biomechanical Index, and Tomographic and Biomechanical Index (TBI).
RESULTS: The study group consisted of 21 patients (10 men and 11 women; mean age: 27.7 ± 6.9 years), and the control group consisted of 35 patients (17 men and 18 women; mean age: 26.1 ± 5.8 years). No significant differences were found between the eyes with subclinical keratoconus and normal eyes in corrected distance visual acuity and the topographic, topometric, and tomographic parameters (P > .05). Significant differences were found in the values of A2 length, A1 velocity, A2 velocity, and TBI between the subclinical keratoconus group and the control group (P < .05). In distinguishing eyes with subclinical keratoconus from normal eyes, the TBI showed the highest area under the curve (0.790; cut-off: 0.29; sensitivity: 67%; specificity: 86%) in the receiver operating characteristic analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: Biomechanical analysis with the Corvis ST may be used as a complementary diagnostic method in detecting subclinical keratoconus. [J Refract Surg. 2019;35(4):247-252.]. Copyright 2019, SLACK Incorporated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30984982     DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20190226-01

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Refract Surg        ISSN: 1081-597X            Impact factor:   3.573


  16 in total

1.  Assessment of corneal topographic, tomographic, densitometric, and biomechanical properties of Fabry patients with ocular manifestations.

Authors:  Veysel Cankurtaran; Kemal Tekin; Ayse Idil Cakmak; Merve Inanc; Faruk Hilmi Turgut
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-01-08       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  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

3.  Comparison of Corneal Biomechanical Properties between Post-LASIK Ectasia and Primary Keratoconus.

Authors:  Wuxiao Zhao; Yang Shen; Weijun Jian; Jianmin Shang; Vishal Jhanji; Aruma Aruma; Xingtao Zhou
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-10-26       Impact factor: 1.909

Review 4.  Corneal biomechanics: Measurement and structural correlations.

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

5.  Evaluation of Intraocular Pressure and Other Biomechanical Parameters to Distinguish between Subclinical Keratoconus and Healthy Corneas.

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

6.  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 7.  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

8.  Topometric Indices And Corneal Densitometry Change After Corneal Refractive Surgery Combined With Simultaneous Collagen Crosslinking.

Authors:  Yonrawee Piyacomn; Ngamjit Kasetsuwan; Vilavun Puangsricharern; Usanee Reinprayoon; Vannarut Satitpitakul; Patchima Chantaren
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-09-27

9.  Association between Corneal Stiffness Parameter at the First Applanation and Keratoconus Severity.

Authors:  Kaili Yang; Liyan Xu; Qi Fan; Shengwei Ren
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-12-02       Impact factor: 1.909

Review 10.  Biomechanical diagnostics of the cornea.

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
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.