Biomechanical responses of healthy and keratoconic corneas measured using a noncontact scheimpflug-based tonometer

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 55, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 3651-3659

  Ali, Noor Q ^a   Patel, Dipika V ^a   McGhee, Charles N J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Corneal deformation amplitude; Corvis ST; Diagnostic instruments; Non contact tonometry; Repeatability

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; BIOMICROSCOPY; CENTRAL CORNEAL THICKNESS; CHILD; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEFORMATION AMPLITUDE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; KERATOCONUS; KERATOMETRY; MALE; MEASUREMENT PRECISION; MEASUREMENT REPEATABILITY; NONCONTACT SCHEIMPFLUG BASED TONOMETER; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REPEATABILITY; TOMOGRAPHY; TONOMETER; TOPOGRAPHY; VISUAL SYSTEM PARAMETERS;

CORNEAL DEFORMATION AMPLITUDE; CORVIS ST; DIAGNOSTIC INSTRUMENTS; NON-CONTACT TONOMETRY; REPEATABILITY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; BIOMECHANICAL PHENOMENA; CORNEA; CORNEAL TOPOGRAPHY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; KERATOCONUS; MALE; MICROSCOPY, ACOUSTIC; MIDDLE AGED; REFERENCE VALUES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TONOMETRY, OCULAR; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84902455401     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: 15525783     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.13-13715     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Lombardo M, Lombardo G, Carbone G, et al. Biomechanics of the anterior human corneal tissue investigated with atomic force microscopy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53:1050-1057.
2. Elsheikh A, Wang D, Pye D. Determination of the modulus of elasticity of the human cornea. J Refract Surg. 2007;23:808-818.
3. McMonnies CW. Assessing corneal hysteresis using the Ocular Response Analyzer. Optom Vis Sci. 2012;89:E343-E349.
4. Morita T, Shoji N, Kamia K, et al. Corneal biomechanical properties in normal-tension glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol. 2012;90:e48-e53.
5. Grise-Dulac A, Saad A, Abitbol O, et al. Assessment of corneal biomechanical properties in normal tension glaucoma and comparison with open-angle glaucoma, ocular hypertension, and normal eyes. J Glaucoma. 2012;21:486-489.
6. Schweitzer C, Roberts CJ, Mahmoud AM, et al. Screening of forme fruste keratoconus with the ocular response analyzer. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51:2403-2410.
7. Saad A, Lteif Y, Azan E, Gatinel D. Biomechanical properties of keratoconus suspect eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010; 51:2912-2916.
8. Rabinowitz YS. Keratoconus. Surv Ophthalmol. 1998;42:297-319.
9. Rabinowitz YS, Rasheed K. KISA% index: a quantitative videokeratography algorithm embodying minimal topographic criteria for diagnosing keratoconus. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1999;25:1327-1335.
10. Maeda N, Klyce SD, Smolek MK, Thompson HW. Automated keratoconus screening with corneal topography analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1994;35:2749-2757.
11. Rabinowitz YS. Videokeratographic indices to aid in screening for keratoconus. J Refract Surg. 1995;11:371-379.
12. Hurmeric V, Sahin A, Ozge G, Bayer A. The relationship between corneal biomechanical properties and confocal microscopy findings in normal and keratoconic eyes. Cornea. 2010;29:641-649.
13. Ku JY, Neiderer RL, Patel DV, et al. Laser scanning in vivo confocal analysis of keratocyte density in keratoconus. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:845-850.
14. Niederer RL, Perumal D, Sherwin T, McGhee CNJ. Laser scanning in vivo confocal microscopy reveals reduced innervation and reduction in cell density in all layers of the keratoconic cornea. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49: 2964-2970.
15. Andreassen TT, Simonsen AH, Oxlund H. Biomechanical properties of keratoconus and normal corneas. Exp Eye Res. 1980;31:435-441.
16. Nash IS, Greene PR, Foster CS. Comparison of mechanical properties of keratoconus and normal corneas. Exp Eye Res. 1982;35:413-424.
17. de Sanctis U, Loiacono C, Richiardi L, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of posterior corneal elevation measured by Pentacam in discriminating keratoconus/subclinical keratoconus. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:1534-1539.
18. Zadnik K, Barr JT, Edrington TB, et al. Baseline findings in the Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1998;39:2537-2546.
19. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measurement error. BMJ. 1996;313:744.
20. Dawson B, Trapp RG. Research questions about two separate or independent groups. In: Last, Initial (ed). Basic and Clinical Biostatistics, 4th ed. United States: Lange Medical Books/McGraw-Hill; 2004:134-153.
21. Hon Y, Lam AK. Corneal deformation measurement using Scheimpflug noncontact tonometry. Optom Vis Sci. 2013;90: e1-e8.
22. Hong J, Xu J, Wei AA. New tonometer-the Corvis ST tonometer: clinical comparison with noncontact and Goldmann applanation tonometers. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54:659-665.
23. Leung CK, Ye C, Weinreb RN. An ultra-high speed Scheimpflug camera for evaluation of corneal deformation response and its impact on intraocular pressure measurement. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54:2885-2892.
24. Reznicek L, Muth D, Kampik A, et al. Evaluation of a novel Scheimpflug-based non-contact tonometer in healthy subjects and patients with ocular hypertension and glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2013;97:1410-1414.
25. Nemeth G, Hassan Z, Csutak A, et al. Repeatability of ocular biomechanical data measurements with a Scheimpflug-based noncontact device on normal corneas. J Refract Surg. 2013; 29:558-563.
26. Valbon BF, Ambrósio R Jr, Fontes BM, Alves MR. Effects of age on corneal deformation by non-contact tonometry integrated with an ultra-high-speed (UHS) Scheimpflug camera. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2013;76:229-232.
27. Daxer A, Misof K, Grabner B, et al. Collagen fibrils in the human corneal stroma: structure and aging. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1998;39:644-648.
28. Niederer RL, Perumal D, Sherwin T, McGhee CN. Age-related differences in the normal cornea: a laser scanning in vivo confocal microscopy study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007;91:1165-1169.
29. Sforza C, Grandi G, Catti F, et al. Age-and sex-related changes in the soft tissues of the orbital region. Forensic Sci Int. 2009; 185:115.
30. Foster PJ, Broadway DC, Garway-Heath DF, et al. Intraocular pressure and corneal biomechanics in an adult British population: the EPIC-Norfolk eye study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:8179-8185.
31. Touboul D, Roberts C, Kerautret J, et al. Correlation between corneal hysteresis intraocular pressure, and corneal central pachymetry. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008;34:616-622.
32. Edmund C. Corneal elasticity and ocular rigidity in normal and keratoconic eyes. Acta Ophthalmol. 1988;66:134-140.
33. Edmund C. Corneal topography and elasticity in normal and keratoconic eyes. A methodological study concerning the pathogenesis of keratoconus. Acta Ophthalmol. 1989; 193(suppl);1-36.
34. Shah S, Laiquzzaman M, Bhojwani R, et al. Assessment of the biomechanical properties of the cornea with the ocular response analyzer in normal and keratoconic eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:3026-3031.
35. Ortiz D, Piñero D, Shabayek MH, et al. Corneal biomechanical properties in normal, post-laser in situ keratomileusis, and keratoconic eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007;33:1371-1375.
36. Luce DA. Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31:156-162.
37. Avetisov SE, Novikov IA, Bubnova IA, Antonov AA. Determination of corneal elasticity coefficient using the ORA database. J Refract Surg. 2010;26:520-524.
38. Fontes BM, Ambrósio R Jr, Jardim D, et al. Corneal biomechanical metrics and anterior segment parameters in mild keratoconus. Ophthalmology. 2010;117:673-679.
39. Fontes BM, Ambrósio R Jr, Velarde GC, Nose W. Ocular response analyzer measurements in keratoconus with normal central corneal thickness compared with matched normal control eyes. J Refract Surg. 2011;27:209-215.
40. Kling S, Marcos S. Contributing factors to corneal deformation in air puff measurements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54: 5078-5085.
41. Emre S, Doganay S, Yologlu S. Evaluation of anterior segment parameters in keratoconic eyes measured with the Pentacam system. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007;33:1708-1712.
42. Piñero DP, Alió JL, Alesón A, et al. Corneal volume, pachymetry, and correlation of anterior and posterior corneal shape in subclinical and different stages of clinical keratoconus. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010;36:814-825.
43. Meek KM, Tuft SJ, Huang Y, et al. Changes in collagen orientation and distribution in keratoconus corneas. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46:1948-1956.
44. Takahashi A, Nakayasu K, Okisaka S, Kanai A. Quantitative analysis of collagen fiber in keratoconus. Nihon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi. 1990;94:68-73.
45. Wollensak J, Buddecke E. Biochemical studies on human corneal proteoglycans-a comparison of normal and keratoconic eyes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1990;228: 517-523.
46. Chakravarti S, Magnuson T, Lass JH, et al. Lumican regulates collagen fibril assembly: skin fragility and corneal opacity in the absence of lumican. J Cell Biol. 1998;141:1277-1286.
47. Akhtar S, Bron AJ, Hayes AJ, et al. Role of keratan sulphate (sulphated poly-N-acetyllactosamine repeats) in keratoconic cornea, histochemical, and ultrastructural analysis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011;249:413-420.
48. Snyder MC, Bergmanson JP, Doughty MJ. Keratocytes: no more the quiet cells. J Am Optom Assoc. 1998;69:180-187.
49. Smedowski A, Weglarz B, Tarnawska D, et al. Comparison of three intraocular pressure measurement methods including biomechanical properties of the cornea. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55:666-673.