Mert Simsek1, Pinar Cakar Ozdal, Mahmut Cankurtaran, Huseyin Baran Ozdemir, Ufuk Elgin. 1. Department of Ophthalmology (M.S., P.C.O., M.C., U.E.), University of Health Sciences, Ulucanlar Eye Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey; and Department of Ophthalmology (H.B.O.), Gazi University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate corneal densitometry and endothelial cell properties in patients with unilateral Fuchs uveitis syndrome (FUS), and to compare results with unaffected contralateral eyes and healthy control subjects. METHODS: A total of 90 participants were included in this prospective cross-sectional study. Forty-five affected eyes of patients with FUS were regarded as group 1 (FUSa), 45 fellow eyes were regarded as group 2 (FUSf), and 45 healthy-control eyes were regarded as group 3. Corneal densitometry was measured with densitometry software of Scheimpflug Corneal Topography (Pentacam HR, Oculus GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany), whereas endothelial cell measurement was evaluated with specular microscopy (Tomey, EM4000, GmbH, Germany). RESULTS: The mean corneal densitometry values were higher in the midstromal (zones; 2-6, 6-10 mm), posterior (all zones), and total thickness (zones; 2-6, 6-10 mm) layers in the FUSa compared with FUSf and control eyes (P<0.05 for all comparisons). The mean values of average cell area and cell size characteristics (minimum, maximum, SD, and coefficient of variation) were higher; endothelial cell density and percentage of hexagonal cells were lower in the FUSa than in the other two groups (P<0.05 for all comparisons). There was a significantly strong correlation between specular microscopy parameters and posterior corneal densitometry values in the FUSa group. CONCLUSIONS: Impairment of endothelial cell function in affected eyes of patients with FUS resulted in increased values of corneal densitometry, especially posterior layer.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate corneal densitometry and endothelial cell properties in patients with unilateral Fuchs uveitis syndrome (FUS), and to compare results with unaffected contralateral eyes and healthy control subjects. METHODS: A total of 90 participants were included in this prospective cross-sectional study. Forty-five affected eyes of patients with FUS were regarded as group 1 (FUSa), 45 fellow eyes were regarded as group 2 (FUSf), and 45 healthy-control eyes were regarded as group 3. Corneal densitometry was measured with densitometry software of Scheimpflug Corneal Topography (Pentacam HR, Oculus GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany), whereas endothelial cell measurement was evaluated with specular microscopy (Tomey, EM4000, GmbH, Germany). RESULTS: The mean corneal densitometry values were higher in the midstromal (zones; 2-6, 6-10 mm), posterior (all zones), and total thickness (zones; 2-6, 6-10 mm) layers in the FUSa compared with FUSf and control eyes (P<0.05 for all comparisons). The mean values of average cell area and cell size characteristics (minimum, maximum, SD, and coefficient of variation) were higher; endothelial cell density and percentage of hexagonal cells were lower in the FUSa than in the other two groups (P<0.05 for all comparisons). There was a significantly strong correlation between specular microscopy parameters and posterior corneal densitometry values in the FUSa group. CONCLUSIONS: Impairment of endothelial cell function in affected eyes of patients with FUS resulted in increased values of corneal densitometry, especially posterior layer.