Cargando…
Evaluation of Intraocular Pressure and Other Biomechanical Parameters to Distinguish between Subclinical Keratoconus and Healthy Corneas
(1) Purpose: To assess the main corneal response differences between normal and subclinical keratoconus (SCKC) with a Corvis(®) ST device. (2) Material and Methods: We selected 183 eyes of normal patients, of a mean age of 33 ± 9 years and 16 eyes of patients with SCKC of a similar mean age. We meas...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8125335/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33924937 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10091905 |
_version_ | 1783693470888624128 |
---|---|
author | Peris-Martínez, Cristina Díez-Ajenjo, María Amparo García-Domene, María Carmen Pinazo-Durán, María Dolores Luque-Cobija, María José del Buey-Sayas, María Ángeles Ortí-Navarro, Susana |
author_facet | Peris-Martínez, Cristina Díez-Ajenjo, María Amparo García-Domene, María Carmen Pinazo-Durán, María Dolores Luque-Cobija, María José del Buey-Sayas, María Ángeles Ortí-Navarro, Susana |
author_sort | Peris-Martínez, Cristina |
collection | PubMed |
description | (1) Purpose: To assess the main corneal response differences between normal and subclinical keratoconus (SCKC) with a Corvis(®) ST device. (2) Material and Methods: We selected 183 eyes of normal patients, of a mean age of 33 ± 9 years and 16 eyes of patients with SCKC of a similar mean age. We measured best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and corneal topography with a Pentacam HD device to select the SCKC group. Biomechanical measurements were performed using the Corvis(®) ST device. We carried out a non-parametric analysis of the data with SPSS software (Wilcoxon signed rank-test). (3) Results: We found statistically significant differences between the control and SCKC groups in some corneal biomechanical parameters: first and second applanation time (p = 0.05 and p = 0.02), maximum deformation amplitude (p = 0.016), highest concavity radius (p = 0.007), and second applanation length and corneal velocity ((p = 0.039 and p = 0.016). (4) Conclusions: Our results show that the use of normalised biomechanical parameters provided by noncontact tonometry, combined with a discriminant function theory, is a useful tool for detecting subclinical keratoconus. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8125335 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81253352021-05-17 Evaluation of Intraocular Pressure and Other Biomechanical Parameters to Distinguish between Subclinical Keratoconus and Healthy Corneas Peris-Martínez, Cristina Díez-Ajenjo, María Amparo García-Domene, María Carmen Pinazo-Durán, María Dolores Luque-Cobija, María José del Buey-Sayas, María Ángeles Ortí-Navarro, Susana J Clin Med Article (1) Purpose: To assess the main corneal response differences between normal and subclinical keratoconus (SCKC) with a Corvis(®) ST device. (2) Material and Methods: We selected 183 eyes of normal patients, of a mean age of 33 ± 9 years and 16 eyes of patients with SCKC of a similar mean age. We measured best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and corneal topography with a Pentacam HD device to select the SCKC group. Biomechanical measurements were performed using the Corvis(®) ST device. We carried out a non-parametric analysis of the data with SPSS software (Wilcoxon signed rank-test). (3) Results: We found statistically significant differences between the control and SCKC groups in some corneal biomechanical parameters: first and second applanation time (p = 0.05 and p = 0.02), maximum deformation amplitude (p = 0.016), highest concavity radius (p = 0.007), and second applanation length and corneal velocity ((p = 0.039 and p = 0.016). (4) Conclusions: Our results show that the use of normalised biomechanical parameters provided by noncontact tonometry, combined with a discriminant function theory, is a useful tool for detecting subclinical keratoconus. MDPI 2021-04-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8125335/ /pubmed/33924937 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10091905 Text en © 2021 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 Peris-Martínez, Cristina Díez-Ajenjo, María Amparo García-Domene, María Carmen Pinazo-Durán, María Dolores Luque-Cobija, María José del Buey-Sayas, María Ángeles Ortí-Navarro, Susana Evaluation of Intraocular Pressure and Other Biomechanical Parameters to Distinguish between Subclinical Keratoconus and Healthy Corneas |
title | Evaluation of Intraocular Pressure and Other Biomechanical Parameters to Distinguish between Subclinical Keratoconus and Healthy Corneas |
title_full | Evaluation of Intraocular Pressure and Other Biomechanical Parameters to Distinguish between Subclinical Keratoconus and Healthy Corneas |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of Intraocular Pressure and Other Biomechanical Parameters to Distinguish between Subclinical Keratoconus and Healthy Corneas |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of Intraocular Pressure and Other Biomechanical Parameters to Distinguish between Subclinical Keratoconus and Healthy Corneas |
title_short | Evaluation of Intraocular Pressure and Other Biomechanical Parameters to Distinguish between Subclinical Keratoconus and Healthy Corneas |
title_sort | evaluation of intraocular pressure and other biomechanical parameters to distinguish between subclinical keratoconus and healthy corneas |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8125335/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33924937 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10091905 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT perismartinezcristina evaluationofintraocularpressureandotherbiomechanicalparameterstodistinguishbetweensubclinicalkeratoconusandhealthycorneas AT diezajenjomariaamparo evaluationofintraocularpressureandotherbiomechanicalparameterstodistinguishbetweensubclinicalkeratoconusandhealthycorneas AT garciadomenemariacarmen evaluationofintraocularpressureandotherbiomechanicalparameterstodistinguishbetweensubclinicalkeratoconusandhealthycorneas AT pinazoduranmariadolores evaluationofintraocularpressureandotherbiomechanicalparameterstodistinguishbetweensubclinicalkeratoconusandhealthycorneas AT luquecobijamariajose evaluationofintraocularpressureandotherbiomechanicalparameterstodistinguishbetweensubclinicalkeratoconusandhealthycorneas AT delbueysayasmariaangeles evaluationofintraocularpressureandotherbiomechanicalparameterstodistinguishbetweensubclinicalkeratoconusandhealthycorneas AT ortinavarrosusana evaluationofintraocularpressureandotherbiomechanicalparameterstodistinguishbetweensubclinicalkeratoconusandhealthycorneas |