Screening for Keratoconus With New Dynamic Biomechanical In Vivo Scheimpflug Analyses

Purpose: To improve keratoconus (KC) screening with new in vivo biomechanical Scheimpflug analyses. Methods: After adjusting for intraocular pressure and corneal thickness, predefined static and new dynamic Scheimpflug curve analyses [Pentacam HR and Corvis ST (CST); Oculus] of 87 normal eyes, 27 subclinical KC eyes, 42 suspected KC, and 65 manifest KC eyes were reviewed retrospectively. A t test (for a normal distribution), Wilcoxon matched-pairs test (if not normally distributed), and receiver operating characteristics were used to test for statistically significant differences between these groups. In addition, new dynamic curve analyses were performed to analyze corneal dynamics throughout the entire response to the CST air puff impulse. Results: Comparing normal and KC-suspect eyes, the parameters A1 length, A2 length, radius of the inward-bended cornea, and deflection length at the highest concavity revealed statistically significant differences. In addition, the newly calculated “applanation length level” and “deflection length level” demonstrated consistently increasing differences with increasing statistical significance between normal eyes and those with advancing KC stages. However, when comparing normal and subclinical KC eyes, none of the analyzed parameters demonstrated statistically significant differences. Conclusions: In vivo biomechanical analyses (CST) at their current state only marginally improve KC screening protocols. Newly generated parameters such as the applanation length level and deflection length level might further improve early KC screening.

[1]  G. Richard,et al.  Correlation of the KISA% index and Scheimpflug tomography in ‘normal’, ‘subclinical’, ‘keratoconus‐suspect’ and ‘clinically manifest’ keratoconus eyes , 2015, Acta ophthalmologica.

[2]  G. Richard,et al.  Corneal Biomechanical Changes after Crosslinking for Progressive Keratoconus with the Corneal Visualization Scheimpflug Technology , 2014, Journal of ophthalmology.

[3]  K. Abu-Amero,et al.  Genetics of Keratoconus: Where Do We Stand? , 2014, Journal of ophthalmology.

[4]  J. D. Galletti,et al.  Pentacam Scheimpflug tomography findings in topographically normal patients and subclinical keratoconus cases. , 2014, American journal of ophthalmology.

[5]  A. Yıldırım,et al.  Risk Factors in Post-LASIK Corneal Ectasia , 2014, Journal of ophthalmology.

[6]  C. Roberts Concepts and misconceptions in corneal biomechanics. , 2014, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[7]  D. Patel,et al.  Biomechanical responses of healthy and keratoconic corneas measured using a noncontact scheimpflug-based tonometer. , 2014, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[8]  William J Dupps,et al.  Biomechanics of corneal ectasia and biomechanical treatments. , 2014, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[9]  R. Krueger,et al.  Corneal biomechanics as a function of intraocular pressure and pachymetry by dynamic infrared signal and Scheimpflug imaging analysis in normal eyes. , 2014, American journal of ophthalmology.

[10]  Min Gao,et al.  Corneal Biomechanical Assessment Using Corneal Visualization Scheimpflug Technology in Keratoconic and Normal Eyes , 2014, Journal of ophthalmology.

[11]  T. Kohnen,et al.  Validation of metrics for the detection of subclinical keratoconus in a new patient collective , 2014, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[12]  A. Frings,et al.  Anterior and Posterior Corneal Changes after Crosslinking for Keratoconus , 2014, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[13]  O. Muftuoglu,et al.  Posterior corneal elevation and back difference corneal elevation in diagnosing forme fruste keratoconus in the fellow eyes of unilateral keratoconus patients , 2013, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[14]  Ayala Cohen,et al.  Detection of subclinical keratoconus using an automated decision tree classification. , 2013, American journal of ophthalmology.

[15]  D. Gatinel,et al.  Subclinical keratoconus: the need for an objective classification system. , 2013, Ophthalmology.

[16]  Y. Hon,et al.  Corneal Deformation Measurement Using Scheimpflug Noncontact Tonometry , 2013, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[17]  Francesco Versaci,et al.  Use of a support vector machine for keratoconus and subclinical keratoconus detection by topographic and tomographic data. , 2012, Ophthalmology.

[18]  Alain Saad,et al.  Evaluation of total and corneal wavefront high order aberrations for the detection of forme fruste keratoconus. , 2012, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[19]  T. Kohnen,et al.  Detection of subclinical keratoconus by using corneal anterior and posterior surface aberrations and thickness spatial profiles. , 2010, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[20]  C. Hodge,et al.  External analysis of the Randleman Ectasia Risk Factor Score System: a review of 36 cases of post LASIK ectasia , 2010, Clinical & experimental ophthalmology.

[21]  S. Klyce Chasing the suspect: keratoconus , 2009, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[22]  P. Binder Risk factors for ectasia after LASIK. , 2008, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[23]  Sander R. Dubovy,et al.  Corneal ectasia after excimer laser keratorefractive surgery: histopathology, ultrastructure, and pathophysiology. , 2008, Ophthalmology.

[24]  R. D. Stulting,et al.  Validation of the Ectasia Risk Score System for preoperative laser in situ keratomileusis screening. , 2008, American journal of ophthalmology.

[25]  T. Kohnen,et al.  Defining subclinical keratoconus using corneal first-surface higher-order aberrations. , 2007, American journal of ophthalmology.

[26]  Jun Liu,et al.  Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurement: Quantitative analysis , 2005, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[27]  Y. Rabinowitz,et al.  KISA% index: a quantitative videokeratography algorithm embodying minimal topographic criteria for diagnosing keratoconus. , 1999, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[28]  S. Klyce,et al.  Current keratoconus detection methods compared with a neural network approach. , 1997, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[29]  Jae Ryung Kim,et al.  Corneal topographic and tomographic analysis of fellow eyes in unilateral keratoconus patients using Pentacam. , 2014, American journal of ophthalmology.

[30]  R. Ambrósio Simplifying Ectasia Screening with Pentacam Corneal Tomography , 2010 .