Cargando…

Detecting True Change in Keratoconus after Intracorneal Ring Segment Implantation

Confirming the progression of keratoconus is of paramount relevance to providing the appropriate treatment. Real change should be considered consistent over time. It must be greater than the variability of the measurement of the device used to monitor the cornea. The present study aimed to assess th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Arnalich-Montiel, Francisco, Fuente, Carlota, Auladell, Clara, Ortiz-Toquero, Sara
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10142878/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37109508
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life13040978
_version_ 1785033717797879808
author Arnalich-Montiel, Francisco
Fuente, Carlota
Auladell, Clara
Ortiz-Toquero, Sara
author_facet Arnalich-Montiel, Francisco
Fuente, Carlota
Auladell, Clara
Ortiz-Toquero, Sara
author_sort Arnalich-Montiel, Francisco
collection PubMed
description Confirming the progression of keratoconus is of paramount relevance to providing the appropriate treatment. Real change should be considered consistent over time. It must be greater than the variability of the measurement of the device used to monitor the cornea. The present study aimed to assess the intraobserver repeatability and intersession reproducibility of a Scheimpflug camera in measuring corneal parameters in virgin keratoconus and intrastromal corneal ring segments (ICRS) implantation eyes to discriminate real change from measurement noise. Sixty keratoconus and 30 ICRS eyes were included. Corneal parameters were determined in three consecutive measurements and were repeated 2 weeks later. The precision within the same session for all parameters was better in the keratoconic eyes, with mean repeatability limits 33% narrower (range 13% to 55%) compared with ICRS eyes. Mean reproducibility limits were 16% narrower (range +48% to −45%) compared with ICRS eyes. The cutoff values to consider a real corneal shape change were lower for virgin keratoconic than for ICRS, except for the thinnest corneal thickness and Stage C (ABCD system), which were the opposite. Corneal tomography measurements in ICRS eyes showed worse accuracy than in virgin keratoconus, which should be taken into account by practitioners in patients’ follow up.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10142878
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101428782023-04-29 Detecting True Change in Keratoconus after Intracorneal Ring Segment Implantation Arnalich-Montiel, Francisco Fuente, Carlota Auladell, Clara Ortiz-Toquero, Sara Life (Basel) Article Confirming the progression of keratoconus is of paramount relevance to providing the appropriate treatment. Real change should be considered consistent over time. It must be greater than the variability of the measurement of the device used to monitor the cornea. The present study aimed to assess the intraobserver repeatability and intersession reproducibility of a Scheimpflug camera in measuring corneal parameters in virgin keratoconus and intrastromal corneal ring segments (ICRS) implantation eyes to discriminate real change from measurement noise. Sixty keratoconus and 30 ICRS eyes were included. Corneal parameters were determined in three consecutive measurements and were repeated 2 weeks later. The precision within the same session for all parameters was better in the keratoconic eyes, with mean repeatability limits 33% narrower (range 13% to 55%) compared with ICRS eyes. Mean reproducibility limits were 16% narrower (range +48% to −45%) compared with ICRS eyes. The cutoff values to consider a real corneal shape change were lower for virgin keratoconic than for ICRS, except for the thinnest corneal thickness and Stage C (ABCD system), which were the opposite. Corneal tomography measurements in ICRS eyes showed worse accuracy than in virgin keratoconus, which should be taken into account by practitioners in patients’ follow up. MDPI 2023-04-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10142878/ /pubmed/37109508 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life13040978 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Arnalich-Montiel, Francisco
Fuente, Carlota
Auladell, Clara
Ortiz-Toquero, Sara
Detecting True Change in Keratoconus after Intracorneal Ring Segment Implantation
title Detecting True Change in Keratoconus after Intracorneal Ring Segment Implantation
title_full Detecting True Change in Keratoconus after Intracorneal Ring Segment Implantation
title_fullStr Detecting True Change in Keratoconus after Intracorneal Ring Segment Implantation
title_full_unstemmed Detecting True Change in Keratoconus after Intracorneal Ring Segment Implantation
title_short Detecting True Change in Keratoconus after Intracorneal Ring Segment Implantation
title_sort detecting true change in keratoconus after intracorneal ring segment implantation
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10142878/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37109508
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life13040978
work_keys_str_mv AT arnalichmontielfrancisco detectingtruechangeinkeratoconusafterintracornealringsegmentimplantation
AT fuentecarlota detectingtruechangeinkeratoconusafterintracornealringsegmentimplantation
AT auladellclara detectingtruechangeinkeratoconusafterintracornealringsegmentimplantation
AT ortiztoquerosara detectingtruechangeinkeratoconusafterintracornealringsegmentimplantation