The British journal of ophthalmology · 2013
Comparison of three-dimensional optical coherence tomography and combining a rotating Scheimpflug camera with a Placido topography system for forme fruste keratoconus diagnosis.
Сравнительное исследованиеКонтролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Fukuda Shinichi, Beheregaray Simone, Hoshi Sujin, Yamanari Masahiro, Lim Yiheng, Hiraoka Takahiro, Yasuno Yoshiaki, Oshika Tetsuro
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of parameters measured by three-dimensional (3D) corneal and anterior segment optical coherence tomography (CAS-OCT) and a rotating Scheimpflug camera combined with a Placido topography system (Scheimpflug camera with topography) to discriminate between normal eyes and forme fruste keratoconus.
METHODS: Forty-eight eyes of 48 patients with keratoconus, 25 eyes of 25 patients with forme fruste keratoconus and 128 eyes of 128 normal subjects were evaluated. Anterior and posterior keratometric parameters (steep K, flat K, average K), elevation, topographic parameters, regular and irregular astigmatism (spherical, asymmetry, regular and higher-order astigmatism) and five pachymetric parameters (minimum, minimum-median, inferior-superior, inferotemporal-superonasal, vertical thinnest location of the cornea) were measured using 3D CAS-OCT and a Scheimpflug camera with topography. The area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) was calculated to assess the discrimination ability. Compatibility and repeatability of both devices were evaluated.
RESULTS: Posterior surface elevation showed higher AUROC values in discrimination analysis of forme fruste keratoconus using both devices. Both instruments showed significant linear correlations (p<0.05, Pearson's correlation coefficient) and good repeatability (ICCs: 0.885-0.999) for normal and forme fruste keratoconus.
CONCLUSIONS: Posterior elevation was the best discrimination parameter for forme fruste keratoconus. Both instruments presented good correlation and repeatability for this condition.
METHODS: Forty-eight eyes of 48 patients with keratoconus, 25 eyes of 25 patients with forme fruste keratoconus and 128 eyes of 128 normal subjects were evaluated. Anterior and posterior keratometric parameters (steep K, flat K, average K), elevation, topographic parameters, regular and irregular astigmatism (spherical, asymmetry, regular and higher-order astigmatism) and five pachymetric parameters (minimum, minimum-median, inferior-superior, inferotemporal-superonasal, vertical thinnest location of the cornea) were measured using 3D CAS-OCT and a Scheimpflug camera with topography. The area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) was calculated to assess the discrimination ability. Compatibility and repeatability of both devices were evaluated.
RESULTS: Posterior surface elevation showed higher AUROC values in discrimination analysis of forme fruste keratoconus using both devices. Both instruments showed significant linear correlations (p<0.05, Pearson's correlation coefficient) and good repeatability (ICCs: 0.885-0.999) for normal and forme fruste keratoconus.
CONCLUSIONS: Posterior elevation was the best discrimination parameter for forme fruste keratoconus. Both instruments presented good correlation and repeatability for this condition.