The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry

kocamis, ozkan; GÜNDOĞAN, Medine

The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry

Özkan KOCAMIŞ, (Ahi Evran Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Göz Ana Bilim Dalı, Kırşehir, Türkiye)

Medine GÜNDOĞAN (Ahi Evran Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Göz Ana Bilim Dalı, Kırşehir, Türkiye)

Glokom Katarakt

0 0

Yıl: 2019 Cilt: 14 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 82 - 86 Metin Dili: İngilizce İndeks Tarihi: 20-10-2020

The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry

Öz:

Purpose: We aimed to compare central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements in eyes with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) with opticalbiometry ( Haag-Streit Lenstar LS 900 Optical Biometer,Switzerland) and ultrasonic pachymetry (USP) devices.Materials and Methods: We included 35 eyes of 35 patients with POAG in this prospective observational study. CCT was measured withthe optic biometric pachymetry and an USP device (Pac-Scan 300p, Sonomed Escalon, NY, USA). While the fi rst observer conducted themeasurement with both the optic biometric pachymetry and USP devices, the second observer only used the optic biometric pachymetry device.Spearman correlation analysis was used in the correlation analysis.Results: Central corneal thickness with the optic biometric pachymetry was 526.6±39.6 μm for the fi rst observer and 527.7±40.6 μm for thesecond observer. The central corneal thickness was 541.9±43.6 μm with USP. Statistically signifi cant lower measurements were found with theoptic biometric pachymetry device than with USP (p<0.001). A statistically signifi cant and strong correlation was present between the observers'measurements of the central cornea thickness with the optic biometric pachymetry (r=0.995, p<0.001). A statistically signifi cant and strongcorrelation was also present between the central corneal thickness measurements of the fi rst observer using the two devices (r=0.943, p<0.001).Conclusion: Optic biometric pachymetry provides lower central corneal thickness measurements than USP in primary open-angle glaucoma.Although there is a strong correlation between the two devices, this difference may be important in intraocular pressure measurements.

Anahtar Kelime:

Primer Açık Açılı Glokomda Santral Kornea Kalınlığının Optik Biyometri ve Ultrasonik Pakimetri ile Karşılaştırılması

Öz:

Amaç: Primer açık açılı glokomlu (PAAG) gözlerde santral kornea kalınlık (SKK) ölçümlerini optik biyometri (Haag-Streit Lenstar LS 900 Optical Biometer, Switzerland) ve ultrasonik pakimetri (USP) cihazlarıyla karşılaştırmayı amaçladık. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu prospektif, gözlemsel çalışmaya 35 PAAG’lı hastanın 35 gözü dahil edildi. SKK optik biyometrik pakimetri ve USP-(Pac- Scan 300p, Sonomed Escalon, NY,USA) cihazlarıyla ölçüldü. Birinci gözlemci hem optik biyometrik pakimetri hem de USP cihazı ile ölçüm yaparken ikinci gözlemci sadece optik biyometrik pakimetri cihazını kullandı. Korelasyon analizinde Spearman korelasyon analizi kullanıldı. Bulgular: Optik biyometrik pakimetri ile santral kornea kalınlıkları birinci gözlemci için 526.6±39.6 μm, ikinci gözlemci için 527.7±40.6- μm olarak ölçüldü. USP ile santral kornea kalınlık ölçümü 541.9±43.6-μm idi. Optik biyometrik pakimetri cihazı ile USP karşılaştırıldığında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı düşük ölçümler bulundu (p<0.001). Optik biyometrik pakimetri ile santral kornea kalınlık ölçümü yapan gözlemciler arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı, güçlü bir korelasyon mevcuttu (r=0.995, p<0.001). Her iki cihazı kullanan birinci gözlemcinin santral kornea kalınlık ölçümleri arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı, güçlü bir korelasyon vardı (r=0.943, p<0.001). Sonuç: Primer açık açılı glokomda optik biyometrik pakimetri, santral kornea kalınlığı USP’ye göre daha düşük ölçmektedir. Her iki cihaz arasında güçlü bir korelasyon olmasına rağmen göz içi basınç ölçümlerinde bu farklılık önemli olabilir.

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Bibliyografik

1. Marsich MW, Bullimore MA. The repeatability of corneal thickness measures. Cornea 2000;19:792–5.
2. Shih CY, Graff Zivin JS, Trokel SL, et al. Clinical signifi cance of central corneal thickness in the management of glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:1270–5.
3. Herndon L, Weizer J, Stinnett S Central corneal thickness as a risk factor for advanced glaucoma damage. Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:17–21.
4. Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: Baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(6):714–20.
5. Lopez-Miguel A, Correa-Perez ME, Miranda-Anta S et al. Comparison of central corneal thickness using optical lowcoherence refl ectometry and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. J Cataract Refract Surg 2012;38:758–64.
6. Koktekir BE, Gedik S, Bakbak B. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with optical low-coherence refl ectometry and ultrasound pachymetry and reproducibility of both devices. Cornea. 2012;31:1278–81.
7. Gonul S, Koktekir BE, Bakbak B et al. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements using optical low coherence refl ectometry, Fourier domain optical coherence tomography, and Scheimpfl ug camera. Arq Bras Oftalmol 2014; 77(6):345-50.
8. Byeloš Roncević MB, Bušic M, Čima I et al. Intraobserver and interobserver repeatability of ocular components measurement in cataract eyes using a new optical coherence refl ectometer. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011;249:83–7.
9. Beutelspacher SC, Serbecic N, Scheuerle AF. Measurement of the central corneal thickness using Optical refl ectometry and ultrasound. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2011;228:815–8.
10. Beutelspacher SC, Serbecic N, Scheuerle AF. Assessment of central corneal thickness using OCT, ultrasound, optical low-coherence refl ectometry and Scheimpfl ug pachymetry. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2011;21:132–7.
11. Khaja WA, Grover S, Kelmenson AT et al. Comparison of central corneal thickness: ultrasound pachymetry versus slit lamp optical coherence tomography, specular microscopy, and Orbscan. Clin Ophthalmol. 2015;9:1065–70.
12. Sadoughi MM, Einollahi B, Einollahi N et al. Measurement of central corneal thickness using ultrasound pachymetry and Orbscan II in normal eyes. J Ophthalmic Vis Res. 2015;10:4–9.
13. Sedaghat MR, Daneshvar R, Kargozar A et al.. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurement using ultrasonic pachymetry, rotating Scheimpfl ug camera, and scanning-slit topography. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010;150:780–9.
14. Swartz T, Marten L, Wang M. Measuring the cornea: the latest developments in corneal topography. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2007;18(4):325-33.
15. Kim HY, Budenz DL, Lee PS et al. Comparison of central corneal thickness using anterior segment optical coherence tomography vs ultrasound pachymetry. Am J Ophthalmol 2008;145(2):228-32.
16. Nemeth G, Tsorbatzoglou A, Kertesz K et al. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with a new optical device and a standard ultrasonic pachymeter. J Cataract Refract Surg 2006;32(3):460-3
17. Paul T, Lim M, Starr CE et al. Central corneal thickness measured by the Orbscan II system, contact ultrasound pachymetry, and the Artemis 2 system. J Cataract Refract Surg 2008;34(11):1906-12.
18. Dueker DK, Singh K, Lin SC et al. Corneal thickness measurement in the management of primary open-glaucoma: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 2007; 114: 1779–87.
19. Kohlhaas M, Boehm AG, Spoerl E et al. Effect of central corneal thickness, corneal curvature, and axial length on applanation tonometry. Arch Ophthalmol 2006; 124:471–6.
20. Adibelli FM, Oğuz H, Göncü T et al. A comparison of central corneal thicknesses measured with two different methods in cases of primary open-angle glaucoman Semin Ophthalmol. 2018;33(2):167-9.
21. Garcia-Medina JJ, Garcia-Medina M, Garcia-Maturana C et al. Comparative study of central corneal thickness using Fourier domain optical coherence tomography versus ultrasound pachymetry in primary open-angle glaucoma. Cornea. 2013;32(1):9-13.
22. Sen E, Inanc M, Elgin U et al. Comparison of anterior segment measurements with LenStar and Pentacam in patients with newly diagnosed glaucoma. Int Ophthalmol. 2018;38(1):171-4.
23. Borrego-Sanz L, Sáenz-Francés F, Bermudez-Vallecilla M et al. Agreement between central corneal thickness measured using Pentacam, ultrasoundpachymetry, specular microscopy and optic biometer Lenstar LS 900 and the infl uence of intraocular pressure. Ophthalmologica. 2014;231(4):226-35.
24. Tai LY, Khaw KW, Ng CM et al. Central corneal thickness measurements with different imaging devices and ultrasound pachymetry. Cornea 2013; 32(6):766–71.
25. Huang J, Liao N, Savini G et al. Measurement of central corneal thickness with optical low-coherence refl ectometry and ultrasound pachymetry in normal and post-femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis eyes. Cornea. 2015;34(2):204-8.
26. Gursoy H, Sahin A, Basmak H et al. Lenstar versus ultrasound for ocular biometry in a pediatric population Optom Vis Sci. 2011;88(8):912-9.
27. Koç M, Tekin K, Yetkin E et al. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements of tonometry-pachymetry combined device (Topcon CT-1P) with optical low-coherence refl ectometry and ultrasonic pachymetry. Glo-Kat 2017;12:93-7.
28. Gagnon MM, Boisjoly HM, Brunette I et al. Corneal endothelial density in glaucoma. Cornea. 1997;16:314–8.
29. Cho SW, Kim JM, Choi CY et al. Changes in corneal endothelial cell density in patients with normal-tension glaucoma. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2009;53:569–73.
30. Waltman SR, Yarian D, Hart W Jr et al. Corneal endothelial changes with long-term topical epinephrine therapy. Arch Ophthalmol. 1977;95:1357–8.
31. Lass JH, Khosrof SA, Laurence JK et al. A double-masked, randomized, 1-year study comparing the corneal effects of dorzolamide, timolol and betaxolol. Dorzolamide Corneal Effects Study Group. Arch Ophthalmol.1998;116:1003–10.
32. Baudouin C, Labbé A, Liang H, Pauly A et al. Preservatives in eyedrops: the good, the bad and the ugly. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2010;29:312–34.

APA	kocamis o, GÜNDOĞAN M (2019). The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry. , 82 - 86.
Chicago	kocamis ozkan,GÜNDOĞAN Medine The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry. (2019): 82 - 86.
MLA	kocamis ozkan,GÜNDOĞAN Medine The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry. , 2019, ss.82 - 86.
AMA	kocamis o,GÜNDOĞAN M The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry. . 2019; 82 - 86.
Vancouver	kocamis o,GÜNDOĞAN M The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry. . 2019; 82 - 86.
IEEE	kocamis o,GÜNDOĞAN M "The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry." , ss.82 - 86, 2019.
ISNAD	kocamis, ozkan - GÜNDOĞAN, Medine. "The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry". (2019), 82-86.

APA	kocamis o, GÜNDOĞAN M (2019). The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry. Glokom Katarakt, 14(2), 82 - 86.
Chicago	kocamis ozkan,GÜNDOĞAN Medine The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry. Glokom Katarakt 14, no.2 (2019): 82 - 86.
MLA	kocamis ozkan,GÜNDOĞAN Medine The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry. Glokom Katarakt, vol.14, no.2, 2019, ss.82 - 86.
AMA	kocamis o,GÜNDOĞAN M The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry. Glokom Katarakt. 2019; 14(2): 82 - 86.
Vancouver	kocamis o,GÜNDOĞAN M The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry. Glokom Katarakt. 2019; 14(2): 82 - 86.
IEEE	kocamis o,GÜNDOĞAN M "The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry." Glokom Katarakt, 14, ss.82 - 86, 2019.
ISNAD	kocamis, ozkan - GÜNDOĞAN, Medine. "The Comparison of Central Cornea Thickness in Primary Open Angle Glaucoma with Optical Biometry and Ultrasonic Pachymetry". Glokom Katarakt 14/2 (2019), 82-86.