PURPOSE: To report an observation made while performing Scheimpflug densitometry analysis on the corneal region affected in keratoconus (KC) that seems to delineate the base of the cone. METHODS: Scheimpflug densitometries of 20 healthy subjects and 90 patients with KC were examined. Corneal densitometry was analyzed using both "1-layer" and "2-layer" approaches. The first considers the corneal transparency layer by layer at different depths, whereas the second averages densitometry between 2 corneal layers selected by the examiner. Fixed layers, 120 μm depth, and endothelium were selected. Repeated same-day scans and longitudinal series of scans were also evaluated to see whether the findings evolved over time. RESULTS: Eighty-eight of 90 KC cases displayed a bright area on the densitometry map that corresponded to the cone location. The area's characteristics, such as its brightness, contrast, and the presence of a delimiting arc correlated with KC severity and was more noticeable in advanced cases. No similar marks were found in any of the normal subjects. The shape, location, and extent of the mark were consistent over consecutive measures taken on the same day. Changes over time were also seen in eyes with known clinical progression but was also seen in eyes considered clinically stable. CONCLUSIONS: The densitometry mark seems to correspond with the zone most affected by KC and could be a supplementary tool for documenting KC stage, alongside conventional parameters. Further studies are required to ascertain whether it could prove useful in KC detection, to determine progression, and to relate it to corneal biomechanical behavior.
PURPOSE: To report an observation made while performing Scheimpflug densitometry analysis on the corneal region affected in keratoconus (KC) that seems to delineate the base of the cone. METHODS: Scheimpflug densitometries of 20 healthy subjects and 90 patients with KC were examined. Corneal densitometry was analyzed using both "1-layer" and "2-layer" approaches. The first considers the corneal transparency layer by layer at different depths, whereas the second averages densitometry between 2 corneal layers selected by the examiner. Fixed layers, 120 μm depth, and endothelium were selected. Repeated same-day scans and longitudinal series of scans were also evaluated to see whether the findings evolved over time. RESULTS: Eighty-eight of 90 KC cases displayed a bright area on the densitometry map that corresponded to the cone location. The area's characteristics, such as its brightness, contrast, and the presence of a delimiting arc correlated with KC severity and was more noticeable in advanced cases. No similar marks were found in any of the normal subjects. The shape, location, and extent of the mark were consistent over consecutive measures taken on the same day. Changes over time were also seen in eyes with known clinical progression but was also seen in eyes considered clinically stable. CONCLUSIONS: The densitometry mark seems to correspond with the zone most affected by KC and could be a supplementary tool for documenting KC stage, alongside conventional parameters. Further studies are required to ascertain whether it could prove useful in KC detection, to determine progression, and to relate it to corneal biomechanical behavior.