Determining the Most Suitable Tomography-Based Parameters to Describe Progression in Keratoconus. The Retrospective Digital Computer Analysis of Keratoconus Evolution Project.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the most suitable parameters to describe keratoconus progression.

METHODS

Longitudinal retrospective cohort study. Monotonicity and consistency of over 250 parameters extracted from the Pentacam tomographies (Oculus, Germany) of 743 patients was analyzed. Repeatability was calculated for 69 patients (published elsewhere). The parameters were scored based on their performance for each desired feature and a global ranking was created.

RESULTS

Overall, parameters that average a higher number of corneal points performed better than single-point parameters. Zonal keratometries on areas surrounding the maximum curvature point and the steepest front keratometry performed best, followed by front best-fit sphere and mean keratometry of both surfaces. Platform-dependent indices (e.g., Belin-Ambrósio Deviation- or index height decentration-) obtained good scores, but platform-independent LOGIK performed slightly better. Finally, although minimum radius in both surfaces worked competently, minimum pachymetry (PachyMin) performed considerably poorer.

CONCLUSIONS

We presented a list of parameters whose behavior was repeatable, monotonic and consistent, features desirable to describe change. The parameters normally used to follow keratoconus progression may not be the most adequate, as evidenced by the poor performance of PachyMin. Although calculated for a specific Scheimpflug device, most of the best-performing parameters are platform-independent variables, and results may be generalized, pending validation.