Assessment of ocular biomechanics using dynamic ultra high-speed Scheimpflug imaging in keratoconic and normal eyes.

PURPOSE To introduce several new ocular biomechanical parameters for comparison between keratoconic and normal eyes using an analysis method based on corneal dynamic deformation video recorded by corneal visualization Scheimpflug technology (Corvis ST; Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany). METHODS This comparative study comprised 52 keratoconic eyes of 43 patients with keratoconus and 52 normal eyes of 52 controls. An analysis method (PolyU [Labview 2009; National Instrument, Austin, TX]) was developed to introduce several new ocular biomechanical parameters and to compare the difference between keratoconic and normal eyes. The repeatability of the new parameters measurement was evaluated and compared with the Corvis ST measurement. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to establish a cutoff value for the new biomechanical parameters. RESULTS Intraclass correlation coefficients of the deformation amplitude, peak distance, corneal concave radius of curvature, maximum deformation area, maximum corneal inward velocity and outward velocity (Vin, max and Vout, max) were high in both the keratoconic and normal eyes (all intraclass correlation coefficients > 0.75). The measurement agreement of the PolyU analysis method and Corvis ST was good. Most of the biomechanical parameters of patients with keratoconus were significantly different from those of the controls. In the receiver operating characteristic analysis, the Vin, max was the best predictive parameter with an area under the curve of 0.79. CONCLUSIONS The corneal deformation video recorded by the Corvis ST provides useful information for the study of ocular biomechanics. Most of the new ocular biomechanical parameters were significantly different between keratoconic and normal eyes. Further research is needed to develop more comprehensive clinical applications with these new ocular biomechanical parameters.

[1]  Robert N Weinreb,et al.  An ultra-high-speed Scheimpflug camera for evaluation of corneal deformation response and its impact on IOP measurement. , 2013, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[2]  Adrienne Csutak,et al.  Repeatability of ocular biomechanical data measurements with a Scheimpflug-based noncontact device on normal corneas. , 2013, Journal of refractive surgery.

[3]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[4]  A. Elsheikh,et al.  Biomechanical properties of human and porcine corneas. , 2008, Experimental eye research.

[5]  P. Hossain,et al.  Recent advances in ophthalmic anterior segment imaging: a new era for ophthalmic diagnosis? , 2007, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[6]  L. Richiardi,et al.  Sensitivity and specificity of posterior corneal elevation measured by Pentacam in discriminating keratoconus/subclinical keratoconus. , 2008, Ophthalmology.

[7]  T T McMahon,et al.  Baseline findings in the Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study. , 1998, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

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

[9]  J. Krachmer,et al.  Keratoconus and related noninflammatory corneal thinning disorders. , 1984, Survey of ophthalmology.

[10]  C. McMonnies.  Assessing Corneal Hysteresis Using the Ocular Response Analyzer , 2012, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[11]  Christoph Hirneiss,et al.  Evaluation of a novel Scheimpflug-based non-contact tonometer in healthy subjects and patients with ocular hypertension and glaucoma , 2013, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[12]  David C C Lam,et al.  Characterization of corneal tangent modulus in vivo , 2013, Acta ophthalmologica.

[13]  R. Jones,et al.  Full-field deformation of bovine cornea under constrained inflation conditions. , 2008, Biomaterials.

[14]  Jessica H Mathew,et al.  Quantified Histopathology of the Keratoconic Cornea , 2011, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[15]  L. Portney,et al.  Foundations of Clinical Research , 1993 .

[16]  Ö. Uçakhan,et al.  Evaluation of Scheimpflug imaging parameters in subclinical keratoconus, keratoconus, and normal eyes , 2011, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[17]  Geert Molenberghs,et al.  Estimating precision, repeatability, and reproducibility from Gaussian and non- Gaussian data: a mixed models approach , 2010 .

[18]  S. Marcos,et al.  Contributing factors to corneal deformation in air puff measurements. , 2013, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

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

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

[21]  Allan Luz,et al.  Corneal‐thickness spatial profile and corneal‐volume distribution: Tomographic indices to detect keratoconus , 2006, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[22]  Michael W. Belin,et al.  Dynamic ultra high speed Scheimpflug imaging for assessing corneal biomechanical properties , 2013 .

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

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