Differences in Posterior Corneal Features Between Normal Corneas and Subclinical Keratoconus

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare posterior corneal features and their discriminating power for differentiating normal corneas from subclinical keratoconus using the Placido dual-Scheimpflug analyzer. METHODS: Patients were retrospectively included in the study. The preoperative normal right eyes of 79 patients imaged with a Placido dual-Scheimpflug system and with a stable postoperative LASIK follow-up of a minimum of 36 months were included in the normal group and were compared to 39 contralateral topographically normal eyes with clinically evident keratoconus in the fellow eye. The posterior surface variables measured were categorized according to the feature of the corneal shape they were characterizing (curvature, elevation, asymmetry, and eccentricity) and compared between the two groups using the Student's two-sample t test. The discriminating ability of the posterior surface variables was compared by receiver operator characteristics curves. RESULTS: Variables that related to asymmetry and elevation of the posterior surface were statistically significantly different between groups ( P < .05), whereas eccentricity and curvature–related parameters were not. Receiver operator characteristics curves analysis showed that the maximum posterior elevation over the best-fit toric and aspheric surface reference shape had the highest discriminating ability for distinguishing normal corneas from subclinical keratoconus, with an area under the curve of 0.877, followed by the asphericity asymmetry index, with an area under the curve of 0.871, and posterior inferior-superior value, with an area under the curve of 0.851. CONCLUSIONS: Posterior cornea measured with a dual-Scheimpflug analyzer provides useful parameters for differentiating normal corneas from subclinical keratoconus. Of the posterior surface parameters, asymmetry and elevation seem to be the most sensitive shape modifications for differentiating both populations. [ J Refract Surg. 2018;34(10):664–670.]

Multi-level consistent changes of the ECM pathway identified in a typical keratoconus twin’s family by multi-omics analysis

“…The clinical symptoms in these twins were very typical and consistent, including corneal ectasia, thinning, superficial scarring, and a cone-shaped protrusion with Vogt’s striae, Fleischer’s ring, and Munson’s sign. Their parents’ symptoms were not pronounced enough to diagnose KC, but they did present some subclinical manifestations, including larger corneal curvatures, back elevation, and thinner corneal thickness compared to normal, unrelated individuals [ 29 – 31 ]. These complex clinical manifestations in this family supported the hypothesis of a polygenic inheritance pattern.…”

Assessment of Corneal Pachymetry Distribution and Morphologic Changes in Subclinical Keratoconus with Normal Biomechanics

“…Several studies reported that the posterior corneal elevation had a relatively good discriminatory ability for subclinical KC screening and that the posterior corneal elevation difference (B_Elv-D) determined with enhanced best fit sphere was better than the posterior corneal elevation alone to diagnose subclinical KC [3, 23, 24]. Eccentricity is a corneal shape factor calculated within a central diameter of 8 mm averaged over all meridians of the corneal surface, to determine a prolate shape or an oblate shape of the corneal surface.…”

Successful Regression in Patients with Progressive Keratoconus by Corneal Crosslinking

“…Vorteilhaft an einer Beurteilung von posterioren Hornhautveränderungen ist die hohe Sensitivität bez. einer Differenzierung von subklinischen Keratokonusveränderungen im Vergleich zur physiologischen Hornhautkonfiguration [23]. Künftige Studien sollten daher ein breiteres Spektrum von Verlaufsparametern enthalten.…”