Oman Journal of Ophthalmology (Jan 2015)

Ocular response analyzer parameters in healthy, keratoconus suspect and manifest keratoconus eyes

  • Mehrdad Mohammadpour,
  • Ifa Etesami,
  • Zahra Yavari,
  • Mohammad Naderan,
  • Fatemeh Abdollahinia,
  • Mahmoud Jabbarvand

DOI
https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-620X.159255
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 8, no. 2
pp. 102 – 106

Abstract

Read online

Background: To evaluate and compare corneal biomechanical indices and their specificity among keratoconus (KC), keratoconus suspect (KCS), and normal eyes (NL) before and after controlling potential confounders. Materials and Methods: A total of 160 eyes in three groups were included prospectively: NL, KC, and KCS groups based on clinical examination and topography. Corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) were measured by the ocular response analyzer. CH and CRF were compared between the three groups by analysis of variances test. Results: The three groups consisted of 80 NL, 48 KC, and 32 KCS eyes. The mean CH measured was 10.4 ± 1.25, 7.83 ± 1.28 and 10.17 ± 1.80 mm Hg in NL, KC and KCS eyes, respectively. The mean CRF was 10.23 ± 1.75, 6.5 ± 1.63 and 9.98 ± 2.00 mm Hg in NL, KC and KCS eyes, respectively. Mean CH and CRF were significantly different between the NL and KC (P 0.05). Conclusion: CH and CRF can be helpful in differentiating KC from NL eyes; however, they are not valuable for detecting KCS that is the main concern for refractive surgery. Future studies focusing on more accurate tests for identifying KCS, using a consistent grading scale for defining KC and KCS are still warranted.

Keywords