Repeatability of Curvature Measurements in Central And paracentral Corneal Areas of Keratoconus Patients Using Orbscan And Pentacam

Overview

Journal J Curr Ophthalmol

Date 2019 Dec 18

PMID 31844787

Citations 6

Authors

Ali Mirzajani

Amir Asharlous

Parvin Kianpoor

Ebrahim Jafarzadehpur

Abbasali Yekta

Mehdi Khabazkhoob

Hassan Hashemi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the repeatability of curvature measurements in 5 corneal rings (1-5 mm from the corneal center) in keratoconus (KCN) patients using the Orbscan and Pentacam and to compare the values of these devices.

Methods: Forty-eight patients with a definite diagnosis of KCN were included in the study. Patients with any corneal scar or active disease or a history of ocular surgery were excluded from the study. The right eye of the patients was studied three times with the Orbscan and Pentacam. The repeatability of the curvatures of 5 corneal rings (1-5 mm from the corneal center) was evaluated using the Orbscan and Pentacam, and the agreement of their values was analyzed.

Results: The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of three measurements was at least 0.94 ( < 0.0001) for the Orbscan and at least 0.88 ( < 0.0001) for the Pentacam in all corneal rings. According to the grade of KCN, the Orbscan had a low ICC in the 2 mm ring in grades 2 and 3 (ICC = 0.750 and 0.298, respectively). Repeated measures ANOVA showed no significant difference between the repeated measurements of the Orbscan and Pentacam in all corneal rings. The paired -test showed a significant difference in curvature measurements in all rings except for the 5-mm ring between the two devices ( < 0.0001). The Bland-Altman plot showed a week agreement between these two devices in 1-4 mm corneal rings in curvatures more than 45 D.

Conclusions: According to the results of this study, keratometry readings are highly repeatable in Pentacam and Orbscan devices in all corneal rings. Despite the high correlation between curvature measurements of the Orbscan and Pentacam, there was a significant statistical and clinical difference between the results of two devices in all corneal rings (except the 5-mm ring), and the curvature measurements of the Pentacam were steeper than Orbscan measurements.

Citing Articles

Repeatability and agreement of two ocular biometers with single and dual Scheimpflug cameras in keratoconus eyes.

Lwowski C, Kruger D, Kohnen T Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2024; 262(11):3701-3709.

PMID: 39046518 DOI: 10.1007/s00417-024-06511-z.

Progress of corneal morphological examination combined with biomechanical examination in preoperative screening for keratorefractive surgery.

Gui Y, Wang S, He Y, Zhang S, Zhang Y Indian J Ophthalmol. 2023; 71(6):2369-2378.

PMID: 37322646 PMC: 10417961. DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1377_22.

Repeatability of Corneal Densitometry Measurements using a Scheimpflug Camera in Healthy Normal Corneas.

Pakbin M, Khabazkhoob M, Pakravan M, Fotouhi A, Jafarzadehpur E, Aghamirsalim M J Curr Ophthalmol. 2022; 34(1):50-55.

PMID: 35620364 PMC: 9128441. DOI: 10.4103/joco.joco_173_21.

Amplicon Sequencing of Single-Copy Protein-Coding Genes Reveals Accurate Diversity for Sequence-Discrete Microbiome Populations.

Yang C, Su Q, Tang M, Luo S, Zheng H, Zhang X Microbiol Spectr. 2022; 10(2):e0210521.

PMID: 35416715 PMC: 9045262. DOI: 10.1128/spectrum.02105-21.

Agreement in anterior segment measurements between swept-source and Scheimpflug-based optical biometries in keratoconic eyes: a pilot study.

Chalkiadaki E, Gartaganis P, Ntravalias T, Giannakis I, Manousakis E, Karmiris E Ther Adv Ophthalmol. 2022; 14:25158414211063283.

PMID: 35387236 PMC: 8978314. DOI: 10.1177/25158414211063283.

References

Mohammadpour M, Masoumi A, Mirghorbani M, Shahraki K, Hashemi H . Updates on corneal collagen cross-linking: Indications, techniques and clinical outcomes. J Curr Ophthalmol. 2017; 29(4):235-247. PMC: 5735256. DOI: 10.1016/j.joco.2017.07.003. View

Chakrabarti H, Craig J, Brahma A, Malik T, McGhee C . Comparison of corneal thickness measurements using ultrasound and Orbscan slit-scanning topography in normal and post-LASIK eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001; 27(11):1823-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(01)01089-6. View

Hashemi H, Yekta A, Khabazkhoob M . Effect of keratoconus grades on repeatability of keratometry readings: Comparison of 5 devices. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015; 41(5):1065-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.08.043. View

Romero-Jimenez M, Santodomingo-Rubido J, Wolffsohn J . Keratoconus: a review. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2010; 33(4):157-66. DOI: 10.1016/j.clae.2010.04.006. View

Kumar M, Shetty R, Jayadev C, Rao H, Dutta D . Repeatability and agreement of five imaging systems for measuring anterior segment parameters in healthy eyes. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2017; 65(4):288-294. PMC: 5452580. DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_729_16. View

Ucakhan O, Cetinkor V, Ozkan M, Kanpolat A . Evaluation of Scheimpflug imaging parameters in subclinical keratoconus, keratoconus, and normal eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011; 37(6):1116-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.12.049. View

Quisling S, Sjoberg S, Zimmerman B, Goins K, Sutphin J . Comparison of Pentacam and Orbscan IIz on posterior curvature topography measurements in keratoconus eyes. Ophthalmology. 2006; 113(9):1629-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.03.046. View

Hashemi H, Khabazkhoob M, Yazdani N, Ostadimoghaddam H, Norouzirad R, Amanzadeh K . The prevalence of keratoconus in a young population in Mashhad, Iran. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2014; 34(5):519-27. DOI: 10.1111/opo.12147. View

Maguire L, Bourne W . Corneal topography of early keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol. 1989; 108(2):107-12. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9394(89)90001-9. View

10.

Du X, Chen M, Ma L, Wang X, Xie L . [Comparison of Pentacam and OrbscanII systems for the diagnosis of keratoconus suspects]. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2012; 48(4):323-9. View

11.

Kawamorita T, Uozato H, Kamiya K, Bax L, Tsutsui K, Aizawa D . Repeatability, reproducibility, and agreement characteristics of rotating Scheimpflug photography and scanning-slit corneal topography for corneal power measurement. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008; 35(1):127-33. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.10.019. View

12.

Tajbakhsh Z, Salouti R, Nowroozzadeh M, Aghazadeh-Amiri M, Tabatabaee S, Zamani M . Comparison of keratometry measurements using the Pentacam HR, the Orbscan IIz, and the TMS-4 topographer. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2012; 32(6):539-46. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2012.00942.x. View

13.

Mihaltz K, Kovacs I, Takacs A, Nagy Z . Evaluation of keratometric, pachymetric, and elevation parameters of keratoconic corneas with pentacam. Cornea. 2009; 28(9):976-80. DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e31819e34de. View

14.

Rabinowitz Y . Keratoconus. Surv Ophthalmol. 1998; 42(4):297-319. DOI: 10.1016/s0039-6257(97)00119-7. View

15.

Nielsen K, Hjortdal J, Nohr E, Ehlers N . Incidence and prevalence of keratoconus in Denmark. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2007; 85(8):890-2. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0420.2007.00981.x. View

16.

Lackner B, Schmidinger G, Pieh S, Funovics M, Skorpik C . Repeatability and reproducibility of central corneal thickness measurement with Pentacam, Orbscan, and ultrasound. Optom Vis Sci. 2005; 82(10):892-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.opx.0000180817.46312.0a. View

17.

Crawford A, Patel D, McGhee C . Comparison and repeatability of keratometric and corneal power measurements obtained by Orbscan II, Pentacam, and Galilei corneal tomography systems. Am J Ophthalmol. 2013; 156(1):53-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2013.01.029. View