Corneal hysteresis and corneal resistance factor in pellucid marginal degeneration

Purpose: To evaluate and compare corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) in pellucid marginal degeneration (PMD), keratoconus (KCN), and normal eyes using the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA). Methods: In this retrospective study, corneal biomechanical parameters were measured in p...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mohamad Reza Sedaghat, Hadi Ostadi-Moghadam, Mahmoud Jabbarvand, Farshad Askarizadeh, Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam, Foroozan Narooie-Noori
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2018-03-01
Series:Journal of Current Ophthalmology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452232517300823
Description
Summary:Purpose: To evaluate and compare corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) in pellucid marginal degeneration (PMD), keratoconus (KCN), and normal eyes using the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA). Methods: In this retrospective study, corneal biomechanical parameters were measured in patients with PMD (n = 102) and KCN (n = 202) and normal subjects (n = 208) using the ORA. Data, including full patient history as well as the results of refraction, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, Pentacam HR (Oculus), and ORA (Reichert; Buffalo, New York, USA), were collected from medical records. Also, the data of only one eye per individual were selected for the analysis. The inclusion criteria for PMD and KCN groups were a reliable diagnosis of these ectatic disorders based on the clinical and corneal tomographic findings. CH, CRF, CH–CRF, intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements were assessed for each subject. Data were analyzed with SPSS and MedCalc using the ANOVA, Pearson Correlation, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Results: The mean CH was 8.91 mmHg ± 1.05 [standard deviation (SD)], 8.43 ± 0.78, and 10.89 ± 1.08 in the PMD, KCN, and normal group, respectively. Also, the mean CRF was 8.21 ± 1.35, 7.19 ± 1.11, and 10.69 ± 1.41 in the PMD, KCN, and normal group, respectively. ANOVA showed differences in the mean CH, CRF, and CH–CRF between three groups (P < 0.001). Also, ROC curve analysis showed the cut-off points ≤9.5, ≤9.5, and >1.3 mmHg for CH, CRF, and CH–CRF in the PMD group, respectively. For biomechanical parameters in PMD eyes, CRF had the highest sensitivity (75.49%) while the greatest area under the ROC curve (AUC) was seen for CH (0.903). Moreover, central corneal thickness (CCT) showed no correlation with CH (P = 0.30, r = −0.104) or CRF (P = 0.75, r = 0.033) in the PMD group. Conclusions: This study presented the values of corneal biomechanics for PMD using the ORA. The results of the ORA were markedly different between PMD, KCN, and normal eyes.
ISSN:2452-2325