Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2011
Comparing corneal variables in healthy subjects and patients with primary open-angle glaucoma.
Сравнительное 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.
Saenz-Frances Federico, Garcia-Feijó Julian, Jañez Luis, Borrego-Sanz Lara, Martinez de la Casa Jose M, Fernandez-Vidal Ana, Mendez-Hernández Carmen, Santos-Bueso Enrique, Reche-Frutos Juan, Garcia-Sánchez Julian
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study was designed to identify possible differences between healthy subjects and patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) in keratometry, central corneal thickness, overall corneal thickness, mean thickness of a circular zone centered at the corneal apex of 1-mm radius (zone I), and mean thickness of several concentric rings also centered at the apex of 1-mm width (zones II to VI, respectively).
METHODS: These variables were recorded in 126 healthy subjects and 130 patients with POAG. Corneal thicknesses and the power of the flattest and steepest axes were compared between the two populations using a t-test and the position of the flattest axis using a Mann-Whitney U test. A binary logistic regression procedure was used to determine the diagnostic capacity of the corneal variables using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) to select the best regression equation.
RESULTS: Significant differences between subjects and patients were detected in mean corneal thickness and in mean thicknesses of zones I to VI. The logistic regression model included as predictors the mean corneal thickness and the mean thicknesses of zones IV and VI; for this model, the AUC was 0.711, sensitivity was 67.7%, and specificity was 65.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: Healthy subjects and glaucoma patients differ significantly in terms of mean overall corneal thickness and thicknesses of the corneal zones I to VI defined here. The variables mean corneal thickness and mean thicknesses of zones IV and VI are able to discriminate between subjects with or without glaucoma.
METHODS: These variables were recorded in 126 healthy subjects and 130 patients with POAG. Corneal thicknesses and the power of the flattest and steepest axes were compared between the two populations using a t-test and the position of the flattest axis using a Mann-Whitney U test. A binary logistic regression procedure was used to determine the diagnostic capacity of the corneal variables using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) to select the best regression equation.
RESULTS: Significant differences between subjects and patients were detected in mean corneal thickness and in mean thicknesses of zones I to VI. The logistic regression model included as predictors the mean corneal thickness and the mean thicknesses of zones IV and VI; for this model, the AUC was 0.711, sensitivity was 67.7%, and specificity was 65.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: Healthy subjects and glaucoma patients differ significantly in terms of mean overall corneal thickness and thicknesses of the corneal zones I to VI defined here. The variables mean corneal thickness and mean thicknesses of zones IV and VI are able to discriminate between subjects with or without glaucoma.