Correlation of Corneal Hysteresis (CH) & Corneal Resistance Factor (CRF) with Geometric Corneal Para...
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 12

Th. Filippopoulos, M.D. 1, 2 , K. Platari, M.D. 1 , An. Charonis, M.D., Ph.D. 1 , PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 96 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Correlation of Corneal Hysteresis (CH) & Corneal Resistance Factor (CRF) with Geometric Corneal Parameters. Th. Filippopoulos, M.D. 1, 2 , K. Platari, M.D. 1 , An. Charonis, M.D., Ph.D. 1 , M. Papathanassiou, M.D. 2 , G. Georgariou, M.D. 1 , I. Vergados, M.D., Ph.D 2 .

Download Presentation

Th. Filippopoulos, M.D. 1, 2 , K. Platari, M.D. 1 , An. Charonis, M.D., Ph.D. 1 ,

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Th filippopoulos m d 1 2 k platari m d 1 an charonis m d ph d 1

Correlation of Corneal Hysteresis (CH) & Corneal Resistance Factor (CRF) with Geometric Corneal Parameters

Th. Filippopoulos, M.D.1, 2, K. Platari, M.D.1, An. Charonis, M.D., Ph.D.1,

M. Papathanassiou, M.D.2, G. Georgariou, M.D.1, I. Vergados, M.D., Ph.D2.

1.Athens Vision Eye Institute

2. Attikon Hospital, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Athens Medical School

The authors have no financial interest in the subject matter of this poster.

ASCRS 2010


Th filippopoulos m d 1 2 k platari m d 1 an charonis m d ph d 1

Corneal Hysteresis (CH) & Corneal Resistance Factor (CRF)

  • CH demonstrates a good linear correlation to CCT

  • CH demonstrates less diurnal variability compared to IOP, CCT

  • CRF may be able to differentiate between normal and glaucomatous cohorts

  • in a multivariate analysis IOP appears to be more dependent on CRF compared to CCT

20ms

Montañés JMet al. IOVS 2008; 49: 968-74

Kida T et al. IOVS 2006; 47: 4422-6

Medeiros FA et al. J Glaucoma. 2006; 15: 364-70

ASCRS 2010


Corneal spatial profile characteristics

Corneal Spatial Profile Characteristics

  • proprietary (Pentacam) corneal spatial characteristics useful in keratoconus screening

    • Percentage Increase in Thickness (PIT)

      PIT: (CTx-TP)/TP %

    • Corneal Thickness Spatial Profile (CTSP)

      CTSP: (CTx)=f(x)

Ambrosio R. et al. J Cataract Refract Surg 2006; 32: 1851-9

ASCRS 2010


Our study

Our Study

Objective:

  • to determine if Scheimpflug provided corneal spatial characteristics are better predictors of CH/CRF compared to CCT

ASCRS 2010


Methods

Methods

  • prospective random recruitment of one eye (n=117 eyes) from healthy refractive surgery candidates during 07/2009

  • inclusion criteria: normal topography, normal corneal slit lamp examination

  • independent variables: age, gender, CCT, spherical equivalent, corneal curvature, corneal diameter, ACD, ACV, PIT, CTSP

  • linear regression analysis for individual variables

  • multivariate stepwise logistic regression

ASCRS 2010


Demographics

Demographics

  • average age ± SD: 33.7 ± 9.8 years

  • gender: 60.7% female

  • average logMAR BCVA ±SD: 0.12 ± 0.1

    • (Snellen equivalent ~ 20/25)

  • average SEq ± SD: -4.0 ± 2.7 D

  • average Ultrasonic CCT ± SD: 551 ± 29.2 μm

  • average Scheimpflug CCT± SD: 552 ± 27.4 μm

  • average CH ± SD: 10.6 ± 1.4 mmHg

  • average CRF ± SD: 10.7 ± 1.5 mmHg

  • average corneal diameter ± SD: 12.2 ± 0.4mm

  • average ACD ± SD: 3.3 ± 0.4

p=0.6, student’s t-test

ASCRS 2010


Th filippopoulos m d 1 2 k platari m d 1 an charonis m d ph d 1

CCT vs. CRF/CH

ASCRS 2010


Cornea thickness spatial characteristics

Cornea Thickness Spatial Characteristics

  • ΔCT= CTmax - TP

  • Percentage Increase in Thickness

  • (PIT)= (ΔCT/TP)%

  • CTSP can be expressed by the slope α (μm/mm) of a simplified linear function αx +β fitting our data

  • (α)= ΔCT/corneal radius

average ± 1.96SD

ASCRS 2010


Modified slope

Modified Slope α΄

  • effort to include CCT and CTSP (α) into one value

  • average cornea spatial characteristics of the cohort described by simplified linear function CTx=αavex +βave

  • α΄=((CTmax- βave)/cor. radius)/αave

ASCRS 2010


Linear regression analysis

Linear Regression Analysis

ASCRS 2010


Stepwise logistic regression

Stepwise Logistic Regression

  • dependent variable CH

  • final model included the following independent variables:

    • age (p=0.22)

    • corneal curvature (p=0.60)

    • spherical equivalent (p=0.03)*

    • CCT (p<0.000001)**

    • Percentage Increase in Thickness (PIT) (p=0.67)

    • ACD (p=0.83)

ASCRS 2010


Conclusions

Conclusions

  • CH and CRF are primarily dependent on CCT

  • CTSP/PIT parameters are not better predictors of corneal viscoelastic properties

  • in the multivariate model the spherical equivalent maintained statistical significance

  • further investigation of the relationship of CH/CRF to geometric characteristics including corneal volume may be warranted

ASCRS 2010


  • Login