Journal of current ophthalmology · 2017
Corneal hysteresis and corneal resistance factor in pellucid marginal degeneration.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sedaghat Mohamad Reza, Ostadi-Moghadam Hadi, Jabbarvand Mahmoud, Askarizadeh Farshad, Momeni-Moghaddam Hamed, Narooie-Noori Foroozan
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) in pellucid marginal degeneration (PMD), keratoconus (KCN), and normal eyes using the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA).
METHODS: In this retrospective study, corneal biomechanical parameters were measured in patients with PMD (n = 102) and KCN (n = 202) and normal subjects (n = 208) using the ORA. Data, including full patient history as well as the results of refraction, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, Pentacam HR (Oculus), and ORA (Reichert; Buffalo, New York, USA), were collected from medical records. Also, the data of only one eye per individual were selected for the analysis. The inclusion criteria for PMD and KCN groups were a reliable diagnosis of these ectatic disorders based on the clinical and corneal tomographic findings. CH, CRF, CH-CRF, intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements were assessed for each subject. Data were analyzed with SPSS and MedCalc using the ANOVA, Pearson Correlation, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.
RESULTS: The mean CH was 8.91 mmHg ± 1.05 [standard deviation (SD)], 8.43 ± 0.78, and 10.89 ± 1.08 in the PMD, KCN, and normal group, respectively. Also, the mean CRF was 8.21 ± 1.35, 7.19 ± 1.11, and 10.69 ± 1.41 in the PMD, KCN, and normal group, respectively. ANOVA showed differences in the mean CH, CRF, and CH-CRF between three groups (P < 0.001). Also, ROC curve analysis showed the cut-off points ≤9.5, ≤9.5, and >1.3 mmHg for CH, CRF, and CH-CRF in the PMD group, respectively. For biomechanical parameters in PMD eyes, CRF had the highest sensitivity (75.49%) while the greatest area under the ROC curve (AUC) was seen for CH (0.903). Moreover, central corneal thickness (CCT) showed no correlation with CH (P = 0.30, r = -0.104) or CRF (P = 0.75, r = 0.033) in the PMD group.
CONCLUSIONS: This study presented the values of corneal biomechanics for PMD using the ORA. The results of the ORA were markedly different between PMD, KCN, and normal eyes.
METHODS: In this retrospective study, corneal biomechanical parameters were measured in patients with PMD (n = 102) and KCN (n = 202) and normal subjects (n = 208) using the ORA. Data, including full patient history as well as the results of refraction, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, Pentacam HR (Oculus), and ORA (Reichert; Buffalo, New York, USA), were collected from medical records. Also, the data of only one eye per individual were selected for the analysis. The inclusion criteria for PMD and KCN groups were a reliable diagnosis of these ectatic disorders based on the clinical and corneal tomographic findings. CH, CRF, CH-CRF, intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements were assessed for each subject. Data were analyzed with SPSS and MedCalc using the ANOVA, Pearson Correlation, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.
RESULTS: The mean CH was 8.91 mmHg ± 1.05 [standard deviation (SD)], 8.43 ± 0.78, and 10.89 ± 1.08 in the PMD, KCN, and normal group, respectively. Also, the mean CRF was 8.21 ± 1.35, 7.19 ± 1.11, and 10.69 ± 1.41 in the PMD, KCN, and normal group, respectively. ANOVA showed differences in the mean CH, CRF, and CH-CRF between three groups (P < 0.001). Also, ROC curve analysis showed the cut-off points ≤9.5, ≤9.5, and >1.3 mmHg for CH, CRF, and CH-CRF in the PMD group, respectively. For biomechanical parameters in PMD eyes, CRF had the highest sensitivity (75.49%) while the greatest area under the ROC curve (AUC) was seen for CH (0.903). Moreover, central corneal thickness (CCT) showed no correlation with CH (P = 0.30, r = -0.104) or CRF (P = 0.75, r = 0.033) in the PMD group.
CONCLUSIONS: This study presented the values of corneal biomechanics for PMD using the ORA. The results of the ORA were markedly different between PMD, KCN, and normal eyes.