Intraocular Pressure Before and After Corneal Refractive Surgery: A Prospective Comparison of Corvis ST and Ocular Response Analyzer.

PRECIS: The study showed that Corvis ST's bIOP and ORA's IOPcc do not agree well, before or after PRK, and may not be used interchangeably. bIOP remained unchanged after PRK. PURPOSE: To evaluate the agreement between the biomechanically-corrected intraocular pressure (bIOP) measured by the Corvis-ST and the cornea-compensated IOP (IOPcc) measured by the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) before and after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). METHODS: In this prospective interventional study, a total of 53 patients (53 eyes) were included. Measurements were acquired using both the Corvis-ST and ORA devices before and 3 months post- PRK. The agreement between the two devices was evaluated using limits of agreement (LoA) and Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: The participants had a mean age of 29.6±5.21 years (range: 21 to 40), with 41 (77.4%) of them being female. Following the surgery, the average change in IOP was 0.3±1.7 mmHg for bIOP and -1.6±4.0 mmHg for IOPcc. The corresponding 95% LoA were -3.5 to 4.2 mmHg and -9.5 to 6.3 mmHg, respectively. The 95% LoA between bIOP and IOPcc after PRK was -2.3 to 8.5 mmHg. Notably, the bIOP values were higher for IOPs <20 mmHg and lower for IOPs >20 mmHg compared to IOPcc. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate a weak agreement between the Corvis ST-bIOP and the ORA- IOPcc both before and after PRK. These devices may not be used interchangeably for IOP measurement. bIOP exhibited less variation compared to the IOPcc, suggesting that the bIOP is a superior option for IOP reading following PRK.

Agreement of ocular response analyzer cornea compensated IOP with corvis ST biomechanical IOP following Femtosecond Laser-assisted LASIK.

OBJECTIVES: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement by ORA-IOPcc and Corvis-bIOP after femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK (FS-LASIK). METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, 56 eyes from 56 consecutive patients scheduled for FS-LASIK were enrolled. All patients had IOP measurement with ORA and Corvis ST by two blinded independent expert examiners. IOP examinations were conducted between 8 and 11 A.M. Data were collected at baseline and 3 months after FS-LASIK. RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 29.1 ± 6.3 years, and 42 (75%) were female. The average of central corneal thickness (CCT) decreased from 537 ± 23 µm at baseline to 458 ± 31 µm after FS-LASIK. The mean postoperative change of IOP was 0.0 ± 2.1 for bIOP and -2.5 ± 3.2 mmHg for IOPcc. The corresponding 95% limits of agreement (LoA) was -4.1 to 4.1 mmHg and -3.8 to 8.8 mmHg, respectively. Both methods showed no significant correlation between ∆IOP and ∆CCT. The 95% LoA between bIOP and IOPcc after FS-LASIK was -4.8 to 9.1 mmHg. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the ORA-IOPcc, the Corvis-bIOP showed less variation after FS-LASIK and might be a more appropriate choice for measuring IOP in this condition. The agreement of bIOP vs. IOPcc after FS-LASIK is below the clinically acceptable level, and the two methods could not be regarded as interchangeable.

Angle κ and its effect on the corneal elevation maps in refractive surgery candidates.

PURPOSE: To assess the associations of angle κ and Pentacam decentration indices with elevation maps in normal refractive surgery candidates. SETTING: Salouti Cornea Research Center, Salouti Eye Clinic, Shiraz, Iran. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. METHODS: In this research, the right eyes of 173 refractive surgery candidates were assessed. Data of front and back corneal elevation maps, keratometric data, decentration indices, and corneal astigmatism obtained by Pentacam HR system and angle κ obtained by Orbscan IIz were extracted. Maximum elevation (or depression) for each of the 4 quadrants was recorded. Correlations of elevation values with angle κ, Pentacam decentration indices, keratometry, and astigmatism were examined by Pearson correlation coefficient. 148 age- and sex-matched cases with keratoconus grade 1 were selected as a positive control group, and Pentacam variables were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Overall, data from 173 eyes of 173 normal refractive surgery candidates and 148 eyes of 148 patients with keratoconus were recorded and analyzed. In normal refractive surgery candidates, the mean of angle κ was 5.32 ± 1.36 (SD) degrees. Angle κ had a positive correlation with front and back temporal elevations based on a best-fit sphere (BFS) ( r = 0.339, P = .001; r = 0.300, P < .001, respectively). Front and back keratometric astigmatisms were positively correlated with front and back nasal and temporal elevations ( r ≥ 0.543, P < .001) and negatively correlated with superior and inferior elevations ( r ≤ -0.547, P < .001). These associations no longer existed when using best-fit toric ellipse (BFTE) for calculating elevation data. The thinnest point to vertex decentration was significantly associated with the back temporal elevation (based on the BFTE) in both normal ( r = 0.311, P < .001) and keratoconus ( r = 0.190, P = .021) eyes. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that elevation maps obtained by the Pentacam system using BFS might be affected by both the large angle κ and corneal astigmatism, confounding the preoperative assessment of refractive surgery candidates. Using BFTE as a reference for calculating elevation data should eliminate most diagnostic issues and thus is encouraged in this context.

Inferior Spear-like Lens Opacity as a Sign of Keratoconus.

PURPOSE: To report 21 cases of typical inferior feather-shape lens opacity associated with keratoconus. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we evaluated the association of keratoconus with inferior feather-shape lens opacity in refractive surgery candidates. Visual acuity, demographic, refractive, and topographic characteristics of 26 eyes of 21 patients with inferior feather-shape lens opacity were evaluated in detail. Pedigree analysis was also performed to assess possible inheritance. RESULTS: Overall, 2122 out of 33,368 cases (6.4%) without lens opacity had keratoconus, while 20 out of 21 patients (95.2%) with peculiar lens opacity had definite keratoconus (P < 0.001). Lens opacity was bilateral in 5 cases (24%), and keratoconus was bilateral in all 20 patients with lens opacity. Nine eyes out of thirty-six with a complete data record (25%) had a severe keratoconus and underwent deep lamellar keratoplasty, while 11 (31%) had forme fruste keratoconus. Pedigrees were drawn for eight patients, most families of whom suggested an X-linked recessive inheritance. CONCLUSION: The present study was the first to investigate patients with a peculiar inferior feather-shape lens opacity accompanied by bilateral keratoconus, which was observed in 95% of the patients. This finding should raise awareness as to the possibility of diagnosing keratoconus in the eyes of the patients with these characteristics.

Effect of photorefractive keratectomy on agreement of anterior segment variables obtained by a swept-source biometer vs a Scheimpflug-based tomographer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate agreement of anterior segment variables between Pentacam-AXL and IOLMaster 700 before vs after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). SETTING: Salouti Eye Clinic, Shiraz, Iran. DESIGN: Prospective cohort with interdevice agreement analysis. METHODS: This study included healthy PRK candidates who were assessed with both devices preoperatively and 6 months after PRK. Only data from the right eye of each patient was analyzed. Pentacam-AXL average keratometry (AvgK) and zonal keratometry in the central 2.5 mm zone (zonal-K2.5) were each compared with mean keratometry (Km) from the IOLMaster 700. Other main outcome measures included vector analysis of corneal astigmatism (J0 and J45), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), and white-to-white (WTW) distance. Axial length (AL) measurements by the same devices on a new cohort of 40 patients who had undergone PRK were also assessed. A paired t test was used to assess the interdevice measurement differences, and Bland-Altman analysis was used to calculate the 95% limits of agreement (LoA). RESULTS: This study included 97 patients. Preoperative vs post-PRK 95% LoAs between Pentacam-AXL and IOLMaster 700 were as follows: AvgK/Km (-0.42, 0.08 diopter [D]) vs (-0.49, 0.18 D); zonal-K2.5/Km (-0.40, 0.32 D) vs (-0.57, 0.74 D); J0 (-0.33, 0.18 D) vs (-0.28, 0.35 D); J45 (-0.28, 0.23 D) vs (-0.24, 0.27 D); pupil pachymetry/CCT (-18, 12 µm) vs (-2.6, 19.6 µm); apical pachymetry/CCT (-17.4, 12.8 µm) vs (-1.7, 20.9 µm); ACD (-0.03, 0.13 mm) vs (-0.03, 0.13 mm); WTW (-0.68, 0.23 mm) vs (-0.63, 0.14 mm); and AL (-0.07, 0.01 mm) vs (-0.07, 0.03 mm), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: PRK showed a negative impact on interdevice agreement for CCT and corneal power measurements, whereas it did not have a significant effect on the agreement of devices for ACD, WTW, AL, and the J45 astigmatism vectoral component. For IOL power measurement in post-PRK eyes, the 2 devices could be regarded as interchangeable for measuring AL and ACD but not for keratometry readings.