Discriminant value of custom ocular response analyzer waveform derivatives in keratoconus.

PURPOSE To evaluate the performance of corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor, and 16 investigator-derived Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) variables in distinguishing keratoconus (KC) from the nondiseased state. DESIGN Retrospective case series. PARTICIPANTS Fifty-four eyes of 27 unaffected patients and 49 eyes of 25 KC patients from the Instituto de Olhos, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. METHODS Sixteen candidate variables were derived from exported ORA signals to characterize putative indicators of biomechanical behavior. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the Z statistic were used to compare diagnostic performance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Discriminant value of standard and derived ORA variables as measured by AUC. RESULTS Fifteen of 16 candidate variables performed significantly better than chance (AUC, >0.5) at discriminating KC. Diagnostic performance was greatest for a custom variable related to the depth of deformation as defined by the minimum applanation signal intensity during corneal deformation (concavity(min); mean AUC ± standard error, 0.985 ± 0.002) and a new measure incorporating the pressure-deformation relationship of the entire response cycle (hysteresis loop area, 0.967 ± 0.002). Z statistics assessing the discriminative value of each of the top 5 variables demonstrated superiority to CH (AUC, 0.862 ± 0.002). Concavity(min) had the best overall predictive accuracy (cutoff value, 50.37; 94.9% sensitivity, 91.7% specificity, and 93.2% test accuracy), and the top 4 variables demonstrated the most consistent relationships to KC severity. CONCLUSIONS Investigator-derived ORA variables related to the depth of deformation and the pressure-deformation relationship demonstrated very high test accuracy for detecting the presence of KC. Beyond their diagnostic value, the candidate variables described in this report provide mechanistic insight into the nature of the ORA signal and the characteristic changes in corneal dynamics associated with KC.

[1]  Jorge L Alió,et al.  Corneal higher order aberrations: a method to grade keratoconus. , 2006, Journal of refractive surgery.

[2]  David Touboul,et al.  Correlations between corneal hysteresis, intraocular pressure, and corneal central pachymetry , 2008, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[3]  N A Obuchowski,et al.  Nonparametric analysis of clustered ROC curve data. , 1997, Biometrics.

[4]  A. A. Antonov,et al.  Determination of corneal elasticity coefficient using the ORA database. , 2010, Journal of refractive surgery.

[5]  Matthew R. Ford,et al.  Method for optical coherence elastography of the cornea. , 2011, Journal of biomedical optics.

[6]  H. Oxlund,et al.  Biomechanical properties of keratoconus and normal corneas. , 1980, Experimental eye research.

[7]  Xinghuai Sun,et al.  A new tonometer--the Corvis ST tonometer: clinical comparison with noncontact and Goldmann applanation tonometers. , 2013, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[8]  F. Raiskup,et al.  Detection of biomechanical changes after corneal cross-linking using Ocular Response Analyzer software. , 2011, Journal of refractive surgery.

[9]  G. Kymionis,et al.  Corneal ectasia induced by laser in situ keratomileusis , 2001, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[10]  I. Avni,et al.  Can We Measure Corneal Biomechanical Changes After Collagen Cross-Linking in Eyes With Keratoconus?-A Pilot Study , 2009, Cornea.

[11]  David Touboul,et al.  Biomechanical characteristics of the ectatic cornea , 2008, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[12]  M. Gordon,et al.  Quality of life in keratoconus. , 2004, American journal of ophthalmology.

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

[14]  B. Boyce,et al.  Stress-controlled viscoelastic tensile response of bovine cornea. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[15]  William J Dupps,et al.  Surface wave elastometry of the cornea in porcine and human donor eyes. , 2007, Journal of refractive surgery.

[16]  J. Wolffsohn,et al.  Changes of Corneal Biomechanics With Keratoconus , 2012, Cornea.

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

[18]  Walton Nosé,et al.  Corneal biomechanical metrics and anterior segment parameters in mild keratoconus. , 2010, Ophthalmology.

[19]  Perry S Binder,et al.  Analysis of ectasia after laser in situ keratomileusis: Risk factors , 2007, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[20]  J. Holladay,et al.  Keratoconus detection using corneal topography. , 2009, Journal of refractive surgery.

[21]  Anthony B. Nesburn,et al.  Videokeratography of the Fellow Eye in Unilateral Keratoconus , 1993 .

[22]  Marcella Q. Salomão,et al.  Biomechanical and tomographic analysis of unilateral keratoconus. , 2010, Journal of refractive surgery.

[23]  T. Seiler,et al.  Stress‐strain measurements of human and porcine corneas after riboflavin–ultraviolet‐A‐induced cross‐linking , 2003, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[24]  N. Obuchowski ROC analysis. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[25]  Konstantin Kotliar,et al.  Air-pulse corneal applanation signal curve parameters for the characterisation of keratoconus , 2011, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[26]  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.

[27]  S. Vitale CLEK study reports on the quality of life. , 2004, American journal of ophthalmology.

[28]  Aachal Kotecha,et al.  What biomechanical properties of the cornea are relevant for the clinician? , 2007, Survey of ophthalmology.

[29]  Perry S Binder,et al.  Long‐term results of laser in situ keratomileusis for high myopia: Risk for ectasia , 2007, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[30]  A. Gallois,et al.  Early biomechanical keratoconus pattern measured with an ocular response analyzer: Curve analysis , 2011, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[31]  Stephen D. Klyce,et al.  Corneal Topography of Keratoconus , 1991, Cornea.

[32]  C. H. Edwards,et al.  Calculus with analytic geometry , 1994 .

[33]  William J Dupps,et al.  Hysteresis: new mechanospeak for the ophthalmologist. , 2007, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[34]  S. Marcos,et al.  Dynamic OCT measurement of corneal deformation by an air puff in normal and cross-linked corneas , 2012, Biomedical optics express.

[35]  András Kocsor,et al.  ROC analysis: applications to the classification of biological sequences and 3D structures , 2008, Briefings Bioinform..

[36]  D. Luce Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer , 2005, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.