ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Purpose: To compare the differences between the apparent and actual chord μ. Methods: In this prospective, comparative, non-randomized, and non-interventional study, imaging examinations using Pentacam and the HD Analyzer were performed in the same room under the same scotopic conditions. The inclusion criteria were patients aged 21-71 years, able to provide informed consent, myopia up to 4D, and anterior topographic astigmatism up to 1D. Patients using contact lenses, those with previous eye diseases or surgeries, corneal opacities, corneal tomographic changes, or suspected keratoconus were excluded. Results: Altogether, 116 eyes of 58 patients were analyzed. The patients' mean age was 30.69 (±7.85) years. In the correlation analyses, Pearson's correlation coefficient of 0.647 indicates a moderate positive linear relationship between apparent and actual chord μ. The mean actual and apparent chord μ were 226.21 ± 128.53 and 278.66 ± 123.90 μm, respectively, with a mean difference of 52.45 μm (p=0.01). The analysis of mean pupillary diameter resulted in 5.76 mm using the HD Analyzer and 3.31 mm using the Pentacam. Conclusions: We found a correlation between the two measurement devices, and even though we found considerable differences, both can be used in daily practice. Given their differences, we should respect their peculiarities as well.
RESUMO Objetivo: Comparar as diferenças entre a chord aparente μ e o chord real μ. Métodos: Estudo prospectivo, comparativo, não randomizado e não intervencionista. Os exames de imagem (Pentacam e HD Analyzer) foram realizados na mesma sala e nas mesmas condições escotópicas. Os critérios de inclusão foram idade de 21 a 71 anos; compreensão do termo de consentimento; miopia até 4D e astigmatismo topográfico anterior até 1D. Os critérios de exclusão foram usuários de lentes de contato; pacientes com doenças oculares prévias ou cirurgias; opacidades da córnea; a presença de alterações tomográficas da córnea ou suspeita de ceratocone. Resultados: Em nosso estudo foram analisados 116 olhos de 58 pacientes. A média de idade foi de 30,69 anos (± 7,85). Análises de correlação foram desenvolvidas e o coeficiente de correlação de Pearson (0,647) indica uma relação linear positiva moderada entre as variáveis. A média do chord μ real foi 226,21 ± 128,53 μm e a média do chord μ média foi 278,66 ± 123,90 μm, com diferença média de 52,45 μm (p=0,01). A análise do diâmetro pupilar médio apresentou: 5,76mm no HD Analyzer e 3,31mm no Pentacam. Conclusões: Entendemos a existência de uma diferença significativa entre os métodos e assim a medida de ambos os dispositivos com base em princípios diferentes devemos respeitar suas peculiaridades. Como encontramos correlação entre as duas medidas, acreditamos que ambas podem ser utilizadas na prática diária.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To compare the differences between the apparent and actual chord µ. METHODS: In this prospective, comparative, non-randomized, and non-interventional study, imaging examinations using Pentacam and the HD Analyzer were performed in the same room under the same scotopic conditions. The inclusion criteria were patients aged 21-71 years, able to provide informed consent, myopia up to 4D, and anterior topographic astigmatism up to 1D. Patients using contact lenses, those with previous eye diseases or surgeries, corneal opacities, corneal tomographic changes, or suspected keratoconus were excluded. RESULTS: Altogether, 116 eyes of 58 patients were analyzed. The patients' mean age was 30.69 (±7.85) years. In the correlation analyses, Pearson's correlation coefficient of 0.647 indicates a moderate positive linear relationship between apparent and actual chord µ. The mean actual and apparent chord µ were 226.21 ± 128.53 and 278.66 ± 123.90 µm, respectively, with a mean difference of 52.45 µm (p=0.01). The analysis of mean pupillary diameter resulted in 5.76 mm using the HD Analyzer and 3.31 mm using the Pentacam. CONCLUSIONS: We found a correlation between the two measurement devices, and even though we found considerable differences, both can be used in daily practice. Given their differences, we should respect their peculiarities as well.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of central corneal densitometry changes following Ferrara corneal ring segment implantation in patients with keratoconus, especially the correlation between corneal densitometry and keratometry. METHODS: Retrospective, non-comparative, interventional study based on the review of medical records of patients diagnosed with keratoconus who underwent Ferrara corneal ring segment implantation. Pre and post-operative corneal densitometry measurements obtained with Pentacam HR (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) were analyzed. The follow-up time was 3 months, and data comparison was made, using specific statistical analysis, with the data of 3 months postoperatively. RESULTS: The study sample consisted of 43 eyes of 36 patients. The mean corrected visual acuity improved from 0.82 LogMAR preoperatively (SD ± 0.33) to 0.19 LogMAR (SD ± 0.13) postoperatively. The mean spherical equivalent varied from -4.63 (SD ± 3.94) preoperatively to -2.16 (SD ± 2.63) postoperatively. Asphericity varied from -0.69 (SD ± 0.32) preoperatively to -0.27 (SD ± 0.31) postoperatively. The mean maximum K was 54.01D (SD ± 3.38) preoperatively and 51.50D (SD ± 2.90) postoperatively. The mean anterior densitometric value was 18.26 (SD ± 2.03) preoperatively and 17.66 (SD ± 1.84) postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Corneal densitometry is an interesting technology that should be studied in keratoconus patients. Our results suggest that the corneal densitometry in the cornea's anterior layer reduces after ICRS implantation and correlates with corneal keratometry. Further studies should be performed to increase the knowledge in this field.
