Waveform analysis of deformation amplitude and deflection amplitude in normal, suspect, and keratoconic eyes.

PURPOSE To evaluate the performance of waveform-derived variables in distinguishing normal, suspect, and keratoconic eyes. SETTING Narayana Nethralaya Eye Hospital, Bangalore, India. DESIGN Retrospective case series. METHODS Scheimpflug tomography (Pentacam) and dynamic Scheimpflug analysis (Corvis ST) of 253 normal (253 patients) eyes and 205 keratoconic eyes (205 patients) were evaluated. Among the 205 patients, 62 had keratoconus in 1 eye, while the unaffected eye was suspect. From deformation amplitude, deflection amplitude and whole-eye movement were extracted. A biomechanical model was used to derive a linear (kc [constant]) and nonlinear measure (kc [mean]) of corneal stiffness. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine sensitivity and specificity. The analysis was validated in another dataset of 59 normal, 45 suspect, and 160 keratoconic eyes. RESULTS Deformation amplitude maximum, applanation 1 time and deformation amplitude, applanation 2 time, kc (constant), kc (mean), and deflection amplitude maximum were significantly different between normal and keratoconic eyes (P < .001). The deformation characteristics of the suspect eyes were similar to those of the keratoconic eyes, particularly grade 1 (P > .05). The kc (constant) and kc (mean) had the highest area under curve (>0.98), sensitivity, and specificity greater than 90% and 91%, respectively. Logistic regression using kc (constant) and kc (mean) improved the area to 1.0, with a sensitivity and specificity equal to 99.6% and 100%, respectively. In the validation dataset, the same cutoff yielded a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 99.5%, 100%, and 99.6%, respectively. CONCLUSION Corneal stiffness and waveform analyses could be reliable differentiators of suspect and keratoconic eyes from normal eyes.

[1]  William J Dupps,et al.  Discriminant value of custom ocular response analyzer waveform derivatives in keratoconus. , 2014, Ophthalmology.

[2]  F. Raiskup,et al.  Identification of Biomechanical Properties of the Cornea: The Ocular Response Analyzer , 2012, Current eye research.

[3]  N. Çağıl,et al.  Investigation of the Efficacy of the Cone Location and Magnitude Index in the Diagnosis of Keratoconus , 2014, Seminars in ophthalmology.

[4]  Bernardo T. Lopes,et al.  Discriminant Value of Custom Ocular Response Analyzer Waveform Derivatives in Forme Fruste Keratoconus. , 2016, American journal of ophthalmology.

[5]  Rohit Shetty,et al.  Understanding the Correlation between Tomographic and Biomechanical Severity of Keratoconic Corneas , 2015, BioMed research international.

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

[7]  B. Boyce,et al.  A nonlinear anisotropic viscoelastic model for the tensile behavior of the corneal stroma. , 2008, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[8]  R. D. Stulting,et al.  Effects of Corneal Cross-Linking on Ocular Response Analyzer Waveform-Derived Variables in Keratoconus and Postrefractive Surgery Ectasia , 2014, Eye & contact lens.

[9]  Y. Rabinowitz,et al.  Longitudinal study of the normal eyes in unilateral keratoconus patients. , 2004, Ophthalmology.

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

[11]  Y. Zheng,et al.  Determining in vivo elasticity and viscosity with dynamic Scheimpflug imaging analysis in keratoconic and healthy eyes , 2016, Journal of biophotonics.

[12]  Q. Ren,et al.  Air puff induced corneal vibrations: theoretical simulations and clinical observations. , 2014, Journal of refractive surgery.

[13]  Robert Koprowski,et al.  Quantitative assessment of corneal vibrations during intraocular pressure measurement with the air-puff method in patients with keratoconus , 2015, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[14]  Bernardo T. Lopes,et al.  Detection of Keratoconus With a New Biomechanical Index. , 2016, Journal of refractive surgery.

[15]  R. Shetty,et al.  A cross-sectional study to compare intraocular pressure measurement by sequential use of Goldman applanation tonometry, dynamic contour tonometry, ocular response analyzer, and Corvis ST , 2015, Indian journal of ophthalmology.

[16]  C. McMonnies,et al.  Corneal Responses to Intraocular Pressure Elevations in Keratoconus , 2010, Cornea.

[17]  R. Shetty,et al.  Air-puff associated quantification of non-linear biomechanical properties of the human cornea in vivo. , 2015, Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials.

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

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

[20]  Jonatán D. Galletti,et al.  Multivariate Analysis of the Ocular Response Analyzer's Corneal Deformation Response Curve for Early Keratoconus Detection , 2015, Journal of ophthalmology.

[21]  M. O'Keefe,et al.  Corneal Hysteresis and Corneal Resistance Factor in Keratoectasia: Findings Using the Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer , 2008, Ophthalmologica.

[22]  Michael D Twa,et al.  CLMI: The Cone Location and Magnitude Index , 2008, Cornea.

[23]  J. Ruiz-Moreno,et al.  Detection of subclinical keratoconus through non-contact tonometry and the use of discriminant biomechanical functions. , 2016, Journal of biomechanics.

[24]  A. Sinha Roy,et al.  Role of Age and Myopia in Simultaneous Assessment of Corneal and Extraocular Tissue Stiffness by Air-Puff Applanation. , 2016, Journal of refractive surgery.

[25]  C. Roberts,et al.  Screening of forme fruste keratoconus with the ocular response analyzer. , 2010, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[26]  S. Klyce,et al.  Unilateral keratoconus. Incidence and quantitative topographic analysis. , 1997, Ophthalmology.

[27]  I. Cunliffe,et al.  Assessment of the biomechanical properties of the cornea with the ocular response analyzer in normal and keratoconic eyes. , 2007, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[28]  J. Alió,et al.  Corneal biomechanics, refraction, and corneal aberrometry in keratoconus: an integrated study. , 2010, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.