Keratoconus - a Review from a Tertiary Eye-Care Center

Abstract Purpose To understand the clinical pattern of keratoconus in patients visiting a tertiary eye-care center. This may improve the knowledge of the disease and treatment options. Methods The records from a tertiary eye-care hospital-based center were reviewed retrospectively to collect the req...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of optometry 2009, Vol.2 (4), p.166-172
Hauptverfasser: Mahadevan, Rajeswari, Arumugam, Amudha Oli, Arunachalam, Valarmathi, Kumaresan, Brindha
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Purpose To understand the clinical pattern of keratoconus in patients visiting a tertiary eye-care center. This may improve the knowledge of the disease and treatment options. Methods The records from a tertiary eye-care hospital-based center were reviewed retrospectively to collect the required data. Medical records from 187 patients who had visited the contact lens clinic in the course of a three-month period were reviewed. The data available on demographics, year of diagnosis of keratoconus, topographic measurements, slit-lamp biomicroscopic findings, previously used or currently advised refractive correction, visual acuity and contact lens parameters were reviewed and recorded. Results Of the 187 patients, 365 eyes were included in the study. Six eyes that had previous corneal grafting and 3 eyes that were fellow normal eyes of unilateral keratoconus were excluded. The patients’ mean age was 21.3±6.96 years. There were 172 (47.12%) eyes previously diagnosed as keratoconus and 193 (52.87%) eyes that had been newly diagnosed as keratoconus. In the newly diagnosed group, 188 eyes were fitted with different types of contact lenses and 5 eyes were advised surgery. In the previously diagnosed group, 138 eyes and 6 eyes continued wearing conventional and multicurve custom rigid gas permeable (RGP) contact lenses, respectively. Of the remaining 28 eyes, 3 eyes were fitted with RGP lenses, 16 were refitted with piggyback, 2 with multicurve custom RGP and 7 were advised for scleral lenses or surgery. Conclusion This study brings out the clinical profile of keratoconus patients in a tertiary eye-care center in south India. The findings in this study stresses out the importance of defining the treatment options in keratoconus with the appropriate contact lenses.
ISSN:1888-4296
1989-1342
DOI:10.3921/joptom.2009.166