|
مقاله
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
Title:
|
Biomechanical properties in Keratoconus, Keratoconus suspect and Normal eyes using the Ocular Response Analyzer- A prospective Cross-sectional Study
|
|
Author(s):
|
Mehrdad Mohammadpour MD 1,Hassan Hashemi MD , Mahmoud Jabbarvand MD 1 Ifa Etesami MD 2, Zahra Yavari MD 2, Fatemeh Abdollahinia 3
|
|
Presentation Type:
|
Poster
|
|
Subject:
|
Cornea and Anterior Segment
|
|
Others:
|
|
|
Presenting Author:
|
|
|
Name:
|
Mehrdad Mohammadpour
|
|
Affiliation :(optional)
|
3- Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Farabi Eye Hospital, Eye Research Center
|
|
E mail:
|
mahammadpour@yahoo.com
|
|
Phone:
|
88089763
|
|
Mobile:
|
09123497791
|
|
|
|
|
Purpose:
|
To compare corneal biomechanical indices and their specificity among keratoconus (KCN), keratoconus suspect (KCS) and normal eyes (NL).
|
|
Methods:
|
160 eyes in 3 groups were included: NL, KCN and KCS based on clinical examination and topography. Corneal Hysteresis (CH) and Corneal Resistance Factor (CRF) were measured by Ocular Response Analyzer. CH and CRF were compared between the 3 groups by ANOVA test.
|
|
Results:
|
The 3 groups consisted of 80 NL, 48 KCN and 32 KCS eyes. The mean CH measured was 10.4 ± 1.24, 7.83 ± 1.26 and 10.17 ± 1.65 mmHg in NL, KCN and KCS eyes respectively. The mean CRF was 10.23 ± 1.65, 6.5 ± 1.57 and 9.98 ± 1.87 mmHg in NL, KCN and KCS eyes respectively. Mean CH and CRF were significantly different between the normal and KCN (P<0.05) however after controlling for CCT and sex, there was no significant difference between normal and KCS (P>0.05).
|
|
Conclusion:
|
CH and CRF can be helpful in differentiating KCN from normal eyes; however, they are not valuable for detecting keratoconus suspect which is the main concern for refractive surgery. Future studies focusing on more accurate tests for identifying keratoconus suspect, using a consistent grading scale for defining KCN and KCS are still warranted.
|
|
Attachment:
|
465ORA slides escrs.pptx
|
|