Effect of contact lenses on ocular biometric measurements based on swept-source
            optical coherence tomography

Ferrer-Blasco, Teresa; Esteve-Taboada, José J.; Domínguez‐Vicent, Alberto; Aloy, M. Á.; Adsuara, José E.; Mimica, P.; Montés‐Micó, Robert

doi:10.5935/0004-2749.20190020

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, the results of these devices cannot be compared to each other. The results of this study disagree with those found by Ferrer-Blasco et al [12], whose study showed a significant increase in CCT, but also in ACD and AL when comparing naked eye measurements versus CL wearing. Changes in these parameters were directly correlated with the CL thickness.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…The inclusion criteria were as follows: auto refracted sphere of -8.00 to +4.00 D, astigmatism of ≤ 3.00 D, and/or K values of 41 to 47 D [11]. The exclusion criteria were as follows: presence of ocular or systemic disorders that could affect the measurements, closed-angle glaucoma, history of ocular surgery and/or history of hypersensitivity to anaesthesia [12].…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison between central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth and axial length values with and without contact lenses

Noya-Padin

Nores-Palmas

Giráldez

et al. 2022

J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To compare the values of central corneal thickness (CCT), the anterior chamber depth (ACD) and the axial length (AL) on measurements performed with and without contact lenses (CL) in healthy subjects. ACD was measured with two different devices (Visionix 120+ and EchoScan US-800) and the values were also compared between them. Material and methods: 20 volunteer participants (6 men and 14 women, 24.8 ± 2.73 years) were recruited. In a single visit, participants underwent autorefraction, biometry, topography and pachymetry with the naked eye (without CL). Then, biometry and pachymetry were repeated twice wearing two different CL (Somofilcon A and Nesofilcon A) of -3.00D lens power fitted in random order. Data were compared using t-tests for related samples. Results: CCT values wearing CL were significantly higher than those obtained with the naked eye (Paired t-test; both p ≤ 0.001). On the other hand, no significant differences were found between the ACD or AL values with the naked eye versus any of the CL studied (Paired t-test, all p ≥ 0.111). The ACD values comparing Visionix120+ to EchoScan US-800 measurements were significantly different with both the naked eye and with any CL (Paired t-test; all p ≤ 0.001). Conclusion: CCT measurements cannot be performed while wearing CL. In contrast, ACD and AL measurements were not affected by the use of any CL. In addition, it was observed that ACD results from both devices are not interchangeable neither when measured with the naked eye nor using any CL.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth and axial length values with and without contact lenses

Noya-Padin

Nores-Palmas

Giráldez

et al. 2022

J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Participants were only included if their refractive spherical error was between +2.00 and -4.00D, their refractive cylindrical refractive that was less than 1.00D, their Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was higher than 1.0 in a Snellen Chart [6,7] and their score on a Low Vision Quality of Life (LVQOL) [8] higher than 50 points (LVQOL ± SD = 56.6 ± 2.50 points). Participants were excluded if they had a history of conjunctival, scleral, or corneal disease, glaucoma, a history of ocular surgery and/or, diabetes mellitus, thyroid disorders, and/or systemic disorders that could affect the measurements [9]. No participant was under any type of topical and systemic medications or used artificial tears at the time of the study.…”

Section: Sample and Inclusion Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of absorptive tinted filter lenses on contrast sensitivity in healthy participants under three different environmental conditions

Perez-Baladron

Salgado-Núñez

Garcia-Queiruga

et al. 2022

J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The present study aimed to analyse the influence of absorptive tinted filter lenses on Contras Sensitivity (CS) in healthy participants under three different environmental conditions. Methods: 10 Healthy qualified volunteers who fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria were recruited: refractive spherical error between +2.00 and -4.00D, refractive cylindrical error less than 1.00 D, Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) ≥ 1.0 and Low Vision Quality of Life (LVQOF) score ≥ 50. Participants were scheduled for three-session under different environmental conditions where CS was measured with a Pelli-Robson chart with and without five (ML Filters 450, 500, 511, 527 and 550) absorptive tinted filters lenses: 1) indoor, 2) outdoor on a sunny day, 3) outdoor on a rainy day. The filters were always introduced in the same order, from the higher absorption filter (ML Filter 550) to the lower (ML Filter 450). Results between filters and environmental conditions were compared. Results: There was a statistical difference in the CS values obtained with and without a filter in the measurements performed in all environmental conditions (Friedman test: all p < 0.001) with no differences in the pairwise analysis between filters (Wilcoxon test; all ≥ 0.009). There was no statistically difference in the CS values between environmental conditions without filters or with any of the filters (Friedman test: all p ≥ 0.097). Conclusions: The present study found that coloured filter lenses between 450 and 550 nm wavelength absorption had minimal impact on CS in healthy participants.

show abstract

“…Yet, the correlation between ocular biometric parameters and concomitant exotropia remains unclear, and few studies have evaluated the ocular biometric parameters in concomitant exotropia. Ocular biometric measurements have been widely used in clinical practices such as the calculation of intraocular lens (IOL) power (19), candidate screening for refractive surgery, monitoring of the ametropic progression (20), estimation of the ocular mechanical properties (21), measurement of ocular anatomic changes on different accommodative stimuli (22,23), or wearing contact lenses (24). As a novel non-contact and highresolution optical biometric device, OA-2000 (Tomey, Nagoya, Japan) incorporates swept-source optical coherence tomography and a Placido-disc topographer, which could automatically find a measurable point and complete the scans quickly and accurately.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inter-eye Differences in Ocular Biometric Parameters of Concomitant Exotropia

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To evaluate the ocular biometric parameters in patients with constant and intermittent exotropia by the measurement of swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) optical biometer OA-2000 and comparing it with the normal control subjects.Design: Cross-sectional case-control study.Participants: Fifty-five constant and 24 intermittent patients with exotropia with central fixation and 77 orthotropic normal control participants aged 4–18 years old.Methods: Non-contact and high-resolution optical biometric OA-2000 measurements were conducted under uniform ambient light conditions. The statistical analysis included intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman plot, and independent t-tests.Main Outcome Measures: Spherical equivalent (SE), ocular biological parameters such as pupil diameter (PD), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), and axial lengths (AL). The absolute values of inter-eye differences for SE, PD, ACD, LT, and AL were recorded as AnisoSE, AnisoPD, AnisoACD, AnisoLT, and AnisoAL, respectively.Results: AnisoSE (0.878 vs. 0.577, P = 0.019), AnisoAL (0.395 vs. 0.208, P = 0.001), AnisoACD (0.060 vs. 0.032, P < 0.001), AnisoLT (0.060 vs. 0.031, P = 0.002), and AnisoPD (0.557 vs. 0.340, P = 0.002) were significantly larger in concomitant patients with exotropia. The SE, AL, ACD, LT, and PD showed excellent binocular correlation with ICC values that ranged from 0.943 to 0.987 in control participants and from 0.767 to 0.955 in concomitant exotropia patients. Bland-Altman plots showed the wider range of agreement in patients with concomitant exotropia than the control participants (SE: 5.0288 vs. 3.3258; AL: 2.2146 vs. 1.3172; ACD:0.3243 vs. 0.1682; PD: 2.4691 vs. 1.9241; and LT:0.3723 vs 0.1858).Conclusion: Patients with concomitant exotropia showed larger inter-eye differences in SE, ACD, LT, PD, and AL. Advice should be given to suspicious children to avoid or delay the development of concomitant exotropia.

show abstract

Effect of contact lenses on ocular biometric measurements based on swept-source optical coherence tomography

Cited by 7 publications

References 20 publications

Comparison between central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth and axial length values with and without contact lenses

Comparison between central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth and axial length values with and without contact lenses

Influence of absorptive tinted filter lenses on contrast sensitivity in healthy participants under three different environmental conditions

Inter-eye Differences in Ocular Biometric Parameters of Concomitant Exotropia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About