Usefulness of corneal esthesiometry for screening diabetic retinopathy

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the usefulness of corneal esthesiometry for screening diabetic retinopathy. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out comprising 575 patients attending a diabetic retinopathy-screening program in the city of São Paulo. Corneal esthesiometry was assessed with the Cochet-Bonnet esthesiometer. The presence of diabetic retinopathy was detected with indirect fundoscopy. The validity of corneal esthesiometry in identifying diabetic retinopathy was evaluated by the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity analyses of the corneal esthesiometry for detecting the stages of diabetic retinopathy using different cut-offs showed values less than 80%. The best indices (72.2% sensitivity and 57.4% specificity) were obtained for the identification of patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy. CONCLUSIONS: In the study series, corneal esthesiometry was not a good indicator of diabetic retinopathy.

Corneal Sensitivity Is Reduced and Relates to the Severity of Neuropathy in Patients With Diabetes

“…We also demonstrate a correlation between C-BA and NCCA, which has not been reported in previous studies (4,21). Although the development and progression of retinopathy, nephropathy, and neuropathy are closely associated (28), loss of corneal sensitivity has been related to the severity of retinopathy in one (12) but not other (14,24) studies. In the present study, we did not quantify retinopathy or nephropathy and therefore could not assess for any association with loss of corneal sensitivity.…”

Evaluation of Corneal Sensitivity and Quadrature Variability in Patients with Diabetic Neuropathy

“…In another study the sensitivity and specificity were detected 72.2% and 57.4% respectively. [ 21 ] These results shows that the Cochet-Bonnet esthesiometer can be considered as a reliable tool in detecting corneal sensitivity in DM.…”

Prevalence and incidence of diabetic retinopathy in patients with diabetes of Latin America and the Caribbean: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…The 43 prevalence studies included 47 585 participants and their characteristics are shown in Table 1 . With respect to scientific production by country, eighteen studies were conducted in Brazil [ 30 , 32 , 33 , 35 – 37 , 39 – 42 , 44 , 50 , 54 , 58 , 59 , 65 – 67 ], twelve in Mexico [ 27 – 29 , 38 , 45 , 47 , 49 , 51 , 55 , 57 , 60 , 64 ], four in Cuba [ 31 , 34 , 43 , 48 ], two in Peru [ 46 , 61 ] two in Chile [ 63 , 69 ], and one in Argentina [ 68 ], Costa Rica [ 62 ], Ecuador [ 56 ], Puerto Rico [ 52 ], and Suriname [ 53 ].…”

“…Regarding the diagnostic criteria for diabetic retinopathy, seventeen studies used the ETDRS [ 27 , 30 , 32 , 33 , 35 – 38 , 42 , 43 , 51 – 53 , 56 , 63 , 65 , 67 ], thirteen used the GDRPG [ 39 – 41 , 44 – 46 , 50 , 54 , 58 , 61 , 66 , 68 , 69 ], six the SDRGS [ 47 , 53 , 57 , 60 , 62 , 64 ], three used the American Academy of Ophthalmology guidelines [ 28 , 29 , 49 ], three used the L’ Esperance classification [ 31 , 34 , 48 ], and one used the Revised English Diabetic Eye Screening Program Grading System (REDESPGS) [ 55 ].…”