Ocular biomechanical measurements on post- keratoplasty corneas using a Scheimpflug-based noncontact device

AIM: To analyse ocular biomechanical properties, central corneal thickness (CCT) and intraocular pressure (lOP) in post-keratoplasty eyes, as compared to normal subjects, with a new Scheimpflug-based technology. Moreover, biomechanical data were correlated with the size and age of the donor and reci...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of ophthalmology 2016-02, Vol.9 (2), p.235-238
Hauptverfasser: Modis, Jr, Laszlo, Hassan, Ziad, Szalai, Eszter, Flaskó, Zsuzsanna, Berta, Andras, Nemeth, Gabor
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:AIM: To analyse ocular biomechanical properties, central corneal thickness (CCT) and intraocular pressure (lOP) in post-keratoplasty eyes, as compared to normal subjects, with a new Scheimpflug-based technology. Moreover, biomechanical data were correlated with the size and age of the donor and recipient corneas. METHODS: Measurements were conducted on 46 eyes of 46 healthy patients without any corneal pathology (age: 53.83 ±20.8y) and 30 eyes of 28 patients after penetrating keratoplasty (age: 49.43 ±21.34y). Ten biomechanical parameters, the CCT and lOP were recorded by corneal visualization Scheimpflug technology (CorVis ST) using high-speed Scheimpflug imaging. Keratometry values were also recorded using Pentacam HR system. Scheimpflug measurements were performed after 43.41± 40.17mo (range: 11-128mo) after the keratoplasty and after 7.64±2.34mo (range: 5-14mo) of suture removal. RESULTS: Regarding the device-specific biomechanical parameters, the highest concavity time and radius values showed a significant decrease between these two groups (P=0.01 and P 〈0.001). None of other biomechanical parameters disclosed a significant difference. The CCT showed a significant difference between post keratoplasty eyes as compared to normal subjects (P= 0.003) using the CorVis ST device. The lOP was within the normal range in both groups (P=0.84). There were no significant relationships between the keratometric data, the size of the donor and recipient, age of the donor and recipient and biomechanical properties obtained by CorVis ST. CONCLUSION: The ocular biomechanics remain stable after penetrating keratoplasty according to the CorVis ST measurements. Only two from the ten device-specific parameters have importance in the follow-up period after penetrating keratoplasty.
ISSN:2222-3959
2227-4898
DOI:10.18240/ijo.2016.02.09