| Literature DB >> 35971484 |
Louise P G Esporcatte1,2,3, Marcella Q Salomão1,2,3,4,5, Nelson S Junior6, Aydano P Machado3,4,7, Érica Ferreira1,6, Tomás Loureiro8, Renato A Junior1,2,3,4,6.
Abstract
Knowledge of biomechanical principles has been applied in several clinical conditions, including correcting intraocular pressure measurements, planning and following corneal treatments, and even allowing an enhanced ectasia risk evaluation in refractive procedures. The investigation of corneal biomechanics in keratoconus (KC) and other ectatic diseases takes place in several steps, including screening ectasia susceptibility, the diagnostic confirmation and staging of the disease, and also clinical characterization. More recently, investigators have found that the integration of biomechanical and tomographic data through artificial intelligence algorithms helps to elucidate the etiology of KC and ectatic corneal diseases, which may open the door for individualized or personalized medical treatments in the near future. The aim of this article is to provide an update on corneal biomechanics in the screening, diagnosis, staging, prognosis, and treatment of KC. Copyright:Entities:
Keywords: Corneal biomechanics; corneal ectasia; corneal imaging
Year: 2022 PMID: 35971484 PMCID: PMC9375464 DOI: 10.4103/sjopt.sjopt_192_21
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi J Ophthalmol ISSN: 1319-4534
Figure 1(a and b) Corvis ST tomographic biomechanical display (Ambrósio, Roberts, and Vinciguerra) from both eyes. Note that despite a relatively normal anterior tomographic assessment (top right), we can observe abnormal tomographic and biomechanical index values of 0.46 and 0.75 in OD and OS, respectively
Figure 2Corvis ST tomographic biomechanical display (Ambrósio, Roberts, and Vinciguerra) from OD (a) and OS (b). (a) Despite a relatively normal anterior tomographic assessment on the Pentacam (top right), corneal deformation response revealed an abnormal tomographic and biomechanical index value of 1.0. (b) Note on the Pentacam tomographic assessment (top right) that the front surface curvature demonstrates a moderate keratoconus condition on this eye
Figure 3The Vinciguerra Screening Report from Corvis ST evidencing abnormal biomechanical parameters in OD (a) and OS (b), with more change values in OS (b)
Figure 4Pentacam differential map showing in A stability in OD (A-C) and in B progression in OS (B-D). Observing only K max, we tend to believe that the keratoconus has improved from 60.6 in 02.2021 to 59.5 in 08.2021
Figure 5Corvis ST tomographic biomechanical display (Ambrósio, Roberts, and Vinciguerra) from OD (a) and OS (b). The diagnosis of forme fruste keratoconus was confirmed by the tomographic and biomechanical index of 0.53 in OD (a)
Figure 6The Belin ABCD display shows stability between 6 months in the OD and progression in OS
Figure 7(a and b) Corvis ST tomographic biomechanical display (Ambrósio, Roberts, and Vinciguerra) from both eyes from a 13-year-old father's patient. Despite having a relatively normal anterior tomographic map, we can observe abnormal tomographic and biomechanical index values of 0.65 and 1.0 in OD and OS, respectively