Mohammad-Reza Sedaghat1, Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam2, Javad Heravian3, Atiyeh Ansari3, Helia Shayanfar1, Majid Moshirfar4,5,6. 1. Eye Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. 2. Health Promotion Research Center, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran. hmomeni_opt@yahoo.com. 3. Department of Optometry, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. 4. Hoopes Vision Research Center, Hoopes Vision, 11820S. State St. #200, Draper, UT, 84020, USA. 5. John A. Moran Eye Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 6. Utah Lions Eye Bank, Murray, UT, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the detection ability of corneal biomechanical parameters for early diagnosis of ectasia. METHODS: This retrospective descriptive-analytical study included 134 normal eyes (control group) from 134 healthy subjects and 128 eyes with asymmetric contralateral corneal ectasia with normal topography (ACE-NT, study group) from 128 subjects with definite keratoconus in the opposite eye. Placido-disk-based corneal topography with TMS-4, Scheimpflug corneal tomography with Pentacam HR, and corneal biomechanical assessment with Corvis ST and ocular response analyzer (ORA) were performed. A general linear model was used to compare Corvis ST and ORA biomechanical parameters between groups, while central corneal thickness (CCT) and biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure (bIOP) were considered covariates. Receiving operator sensitivity curve (ROC) analysis was used to determine the cut-off point with the highest sensitivity and specificity along with the area under the curve (AUC) for each parameter. RESULT: All parameters of Corvis ST and ORA showed a statistically significant difference between the two groups except for the first (P = 0.865) and second (P = 0.226) applanation lengths, and deformation amplitude (P = 0.936). The discriminative analysis of corneal biomechanical showed that the highest accuracy for the classic, new, and combined parameters of Corvis ST was related to HCR (AUC: 0.766), IR & DAR (0.846), and TBI (0.966), respectively. Using ORA, the corneal resistance factor (0.866) had a higher detection ability than corneal hysteresis (0.826). CONCLUSIONS: TBI has the best accuracy and the highest effect size for differential diagnosis of normal from ACE-NT eyes with a cut-off point of 0.24.
PURPOSE: To assess the detection ability of corneal biomechanical parameters for early diagnosis of ectasia. METHODS: This retrospective descriptive-analytical study included 134 normal eyes (control group) from 134 healthy subjects and 128 eyes with asymmetric contralateral corneal ectasia with normal topography (ACE-NT, study group) from 128 subjects with definite keratoconus in the opposite eye. Placido-disk-based corneal topography with TMS-4, Scheimpflug corneal tomography with Pentacam HR, and corneal biomechanical assessment with Corvis ST and ocular response analyzer (ORA) were performed. A general linear model was used to compare Corvis ST and ORA biomechanical parameters between groups, while central corneal thickness (CCT) and biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure (bIOP) were considered covariates. Receiving operator sensitivity curve (ROC) analysis was used to determine the cut-off point with the highest sensitivity and specificity along with the area under the curve (AUC) for each parameter. RESULT: All parameters of Corvis ST and ORA showed a statistically significant difference between the two groups except for the first (P = 0.865) and second (P = 0.226) applanation lengths, and deformation amplitude (P = 0.936). The discriminative analysis of corneal biomechanical showed that the highest accuracy for the classic, new, and combined parameters of Corvis ST was related to HCR (AUC: 0.766), IR & DAR (0.846), and TBI (0.966), respectively. Using ORA, the corneal resistance factor (0.866) had a higher detection ability than corneal hysteresis (0.826). CONCLUSIONS: TBI has the best accuracy and the highest effect size for differential diagnosis of normal from ACE-NT eyes with a cut-off point of 0.24.
Authors: Yan Li; Winston Chamberlain; Ou Tan; Robert Brass; Jack L Weiss; David Huang Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 3.351