Cargando…
Comparisons of corneal biomechanical and tomographic parameters among thin normal cornea, forme fruste keratoconus, and mild keratoconus
BACKGROUND: To compare the dynamic corneal response (DCR) and tomographic parameters of thin normal cornea (TNC) with thinnest corneal thickness (TCT) (≤ 500 µm), forme fruste keratoconus (FFKC) and mild keratoconus (MKC) had their central corneal thickness (CCT) matched by Scheimpflug imaging (Pent...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8596950/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34784958 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-021-00266-y |
_version_ | 1784600503735287808 |
---|---|
author | Tian, Lei Zhang, Di Guo, Lili Qin, Xiao Zhang, Hui Zhang, Haixia Jie, Ying Li, Lin |
author_facet | Tian, Lei Zhang, Di Guo, Lili Qin, Xiao Zhang, Hui Zhang, Haixia Jie, Ying Li, Lin |
author_sort | Tian, Lei |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: To compare the dynamic corneal response (DCR) and tomographic parameters of thin normal cornea (TNC) with thinnest corneal thickness (TCT) (≤ 500 µm), forme fruste keratoconus (FFKC) and mild keratoconus (MKC) had their central corneal thickness (CCT) matched by Scheimpflug imaging (Pentacam) and corneal visualization Scheimpflug technology (Corvis ST). METHODS: CCT were matched in 50 eyes with FFKC, 50 eyes with MKC, and 53 TNC eyes with TCT ≤ 500 µm. The differences in DCR and tomographic parameters among the three groups were compared. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to analyze the diagnostic significance of these parameters. Back propagation (BP) neural network was used to establish the keratoconus diagnosis model. RESULTS: Fifty CCT-matched FFKC eyes, 50 MKC eyes and 50 TNC eyes were included. The age and biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure (bIOP) did not differ significantly among the three groups (all P > 0.05). The index of height asymmetry (IHA) and height decentration (IHD) differed significantly among the three groups (all P < 0.05). IHD also had sufficient strength (area under the ROC curves (AUC) > 0.80) to differentiate FFKC and MKC from TNC eyes. Partial DCR parameters showed significant differences between the MKC and TNC groups, and the deflection amplitude of the first applanation (A1DA) showed a good potential to differentiate (AUC > 0.70) FFKC and MKC from TNC eyes. Diagnosis model by BP neural network showed an accurate diagnostic efficiency of about 91%. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the tomographic and DCR parameters differed among the three groups. The IHD and partial DCR parameters assessed by Corvis ST distinguished FFKC and MKC from TNC when controlled for CCT. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8596950 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85969502021-11-17 Comparisons of corneal biomechanical and tomographic parameters among thin normal cornea, forme fruste keratoconus, and mild keratoconus Tian, Lei Zhang, Di Guo, Lili Qin, Xiao Zhang, Hui Zhang, Haixia Jie, Ying Li, Lin Eye Vis (Lond) Research BACKGROUND: To compare the dynamic corneal response (DCR) and tomographic parameters of thin normal cornea (TNC) with thinnest corneal thickness (TCT) (≤ 500 µm), forme fruste keratoconus (FFKC) and mild keratoconus (MKC) had their central corneal thickness (CCT) matched by Scheimpflug imaging (Pentacam) and corneal visualization Scheimpflug technology (Corvis ST). METHODS: CCT were matched in 50 eyes with FFKC, 50 eyes with MKC, and 53 TNC eyes with TCT ≤ 500 µm. The differences in DCR and tomographic parameters among the three groups were compared. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to analyze the diagnostic significance of these parameters. Back propagation (BP) neural network was used to establish the keratoconus diagnosis model. RESULTS: Fifty CCT-matched FFKC eyes, 50 MKC eyes and 50 TNC eyes were included. The age and biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure (bIOP) did not differ significantly among the three groups (all P > 0.05). The index of height asymmetry (IHA) and height decentration (IHD) differed significantly among the three groups (all P < 0.05). IHD also had sufficient strength (area under the ROC curves (AUC) > 0.80) to differentiate FFKC and MKC from TNC eyes. Partial DCR parameters showed significant differences between the MKC and TNC groups, and the deflection amplitude of the first applanation (A1DA) showed a good potential to differentiate (AUC > 0.70) FFKC and MKC from TNC eyes. Diagnosis model by BP neural network showed an accurate diagnostic efficiency of about 91%. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the tomographic and DCR parameters differed among the three groups. The IHD and partial DCR parameters assessed by Corvis ST distinguished FFKC and MKC from TNC when controlled for CCT. BioMed Central 2021-11-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8596950/ /pubmed/34784958 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-021-00266-y Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Tian, Lei Zhang, Di Guo, Lili Qin, Xiao Zhang, Hui Zhang, Haixia Jie, Ying Li, Lin Comparisons of corneal biomechanical and tomographic parameters among thin normal cornea, forme fruste keratoconus, and mild keratoconus |
title | Comparisons of corneal biomechanical and tomographic parameters among thin normal cornea, forme fruste keratoconus, and mild keratoconus |
title_full | Comparisons of corneal biomechanical and tomographic parameters among thin normal cornea, forme fruste keratoconus, and mild keratoconus |
title_fullStr | Comparisons of corneal biomechanical and tomographic parameters among thin normal cornea, forme fruste keratoconus, and mild keratoconus |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparisons of corneal biomechanical and tomographic parameters among thin normal cornea, forme fruste keratoconus, and mild keratoconus |
title_short | Comparisons of corneal biomechanical and tomographic parameters among thin normal cornea, forme fruste keratoconus, and mild keratoconus |
title_sort | comparisons of corneal biomechanical and tomographic parameters among thin normal cornea, forme fruste keratoconus, and mild keratoconus |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8596950/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34784958 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-021-00266-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tianlei comparisonsofcornealbiomechanicalandtomographicparametersamongthinnormalcorneaformefrustekeratoconusandmildkeratoconus AT zhangdi comparisonsofcornealbiomechanicalandtomographicparametersamongthinnormalcorneaformefrustekeratoconusandmildkeratoconus AT guolili comparisonsofcornealbiomechanicalandtomographicparametersamongthinnormalcorneaformefrustekeratoconusandmildkeratoconus AT qinxiao comparisonsofcornealbiomechanicalandtomographicparametersamongthinnormalcorneaformefrustekeratoconusandmildkeratoconus AT zhanghui comparisonsofcornealbiomechanicalandtomographicparametersamongthinnormalcorneaformefrustekeratoconusandmildkeratoconus AT zhanghaixia comparisonsofcornealbiomechanicalandtomographicparametersamongthinnormalcorneaformefrustekeratoconusandmildkeratoconus AT jieying comparisonsofcornealbiomechanicalandtomographicparametersamongthinnormalcorneaformefrustekeratoconusandmildkeratoconus AT lilin comparisonsofcornealbiomechanicalandtomographicparametersamongthinnormalcorneaformefrustekeratoconusandmildkeratoconus |