Biomechanical and tomographic analysis of unilateral keratoconus

Journal of Refractive Surgery

Volumn 26, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 677-681

  Fontes, Bruno M ^a,b   Ambrósio Jr , Renato ^b,c,f   Salomão, Marcella ^c,d   Velarde, Guillermo C ^e   Nosé, Walton ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^b REFRACTA RIO   (Brazil)

^c Renato Ambrosio Eye Institute   (Brazil)

^d Instituto Benjamin Constant   (Brazil)

^e FLUMINENSE FEDERAL UNIVERSITY   (Brazil)

^f OCULUS Optikgeräte GmbH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASTIGMATISM; BIOMECHANICS; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CASE REPORT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORNEA HYSTERESIS; CORNEA THICKNESS; CORNEAL RESISTANCE FACTOR; EYE EXAMINATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; KERATOCONUS; KERATOMETRY; MALE; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UNILATERAL KERATOCONUS; VISUAL SYSTEM PARAMETERS; ADOLESCENT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CORNEA; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHOTOGRAPHY; PHYSIOLOGY; TOMOGRAPHY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BIOMECHANICS; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; CORNEA; CORNEAL TOPOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; KERATOCONUS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHOTOGRAPHY; TOMOGRAPHY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77957688960     PISSN: 1081597X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20091105-04     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. McMahon TT, Szczotka-Flynn L, Barr JT, Anderson RJ, Slaughter ME, Lass JH, Iyenger SK; CLEK Study Group. A new method for grading the severity of keratoconus: the Keratoconus Severity Score (KSS). Cornea. 2006;25(7):794-800.
2. Nichols JJ, Steger-May K, Edrington TB, Zadnik K; CLEK Study Group. The relation between disease asymmetry and severity in keratoconus. Br J Ophthalmol. 2004;88(6):788-791.
3. Li X, Rabinowitz YS, Rasheed K, Yang H. Longitudinal study of the normal eyes in unilateral keratoconus patients. Ophthalmology. 2004;111(3):440-446.
4. Zadnik K, Steger-May K, Fink BA, Joslin CE, Nichols JJ, Rosenstiel CE, Tyler JA, Yu JA, Raasch TW, Schechtman KB; CLEK Study Group. Collaborative longitudinal evaluation of keratoconus. Between-eye asymmetry in keratoconus. Cornea. 2002;21(7):671-679.
5. Holland DR, Maeda N, Hannush SB, Riveroll LH, Green MT, Klyce SD, Wilson SE. Unilateral keratoconus. Incidence and quantitative topographic analysis. Ophthalmology. 1997;104(9):1409-1413.
6. Lee LR, Hirst LW, Readshaw G. Clinical detection of unilateral keratoconus. Aust N Z J Ophthalmol. 1995;23(2):129-133.
7. Rabinowitz YS, Nesburn AB, McDonnell PJ. Videokeratography of the fellow eye in unilateral keratoconus. Ophthalmology. 1993;100(2):181-186.
8. Ambrósio R Jr, Alonso RS, Luz A, Coca Velarde LG. Corneal-thickness spatial profile and corneal-volume distribution: tomographic indices to detect keratoconus. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006;32(11):1851-1859.
9. Randleman JB. Post-laser in-situ keratomileusis ectasia: current understanding and future directions. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2006;17(4):406-412.
10. Klein SR, Epstein RJ, Randleman JB, Stulting RD. Corneal ectasia after laser in situ keratomileusis in patients without apparent preoperative risk factors. Cornea. 2006;25(4):388-403.
11. Luce DA. Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31(1):156-162.
12. Fontes BM, Ambrósio R Jr, Alonso RS, Jardim D, Velarde GC, Nosé W. Corneal biomechanical metrics in eyes with refraction of -19.00 to +9.00 D in healthy Brazilian patients. J Refract Surg. 2008;24(9):941-945.
13. Pepose JS, Feigenbaum SK, Qazi MA, Sanderson JP, Roberts CJ. Changes in corneal biomechanics and intraocular pressure following LASIK using static, dynamic, and noncontact tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;143(1):39-47.
14. Kotecha A. What biomechanical properties of the cornea are relevant for the clinician? Surv Ophthalmol. 2007;52 Suppl 2:S109-S114.
15. Gatinel D, Chaabouni S, Adam PA, Munck J, Puech M, Hoang-Xuan T. Corneal hysteresis, resistance factor, topography, and pachymetry after corneal lamellar flap. J Refract Surg. 2007;23(1):76-84.
16. Shah S, Laiquzzaman M, Cunliffe I, Mantry S. The use of the Reichert ocular response analyser to establish the relationship between ocular hysteresis, corneal resistance factor and central corneal thickness in normal eyes. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2006;29(5):257-262.
17. Medeiros FA, Weinreb RN. Evaluation of the influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurements using the ocular response analyzer. J Glaucoma. 2006;15(5):364-370.
18. Laiquzzaman M, Bhojwani R, Cunliffe I, Shah S. Diurnal variation of ocular hysteresis in normal subjects: relevance in clinical context. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2006;34(2):114-118.
19. Kotecha A, Elsheikh A, Roberts CR, Zhu H, Garway-Heath DF. Corneal thickness- and age-related biomechanical properties of the cornea measured with the ocular response analyzer. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47(12):5337-5347.
20. Kida T, Liu JH, Weinreb RN. Effect of 24-hour corneal biomechanical changes on intraocular pressure measurement. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47(10):4422-4426.
21. Wang M. Corneal Topography in the Wavefront Era: A Guide for Clinical Application. Thorofare, NJ: SLACK Incorporated; 2006:xvi, 313.
22. Belin MW, Khachikian SS. Keratoconus: it is hard to define, but. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;143(3):500-503.
23. Swartz T, Marten L, Wang M. Measuring the cornea: the latest developments in corneal topography. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2007;18(4):325-333.
24. Konstantopoulos A, Hossain P, Anderson DF. Recent advances in ophthalmic anterior segment imaging: a new era for ophthalmic diagnosis? Br J Ophthalmol. 2007;91(4):551-557.
25. Luce DA. ORA waveform analysis and beyond. Presented at: American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery annual meeting; April 3-8, 2009; San Francisco, CA.