All Title Author
Keywords Abstract


Repeatability of 3D OCT Pachymetry in Eyes with and without Contact Lens Induced Corneal Swelling

DOI: 10.4236/act.2013.22012, PP. 63-67

Keywords: Optical Coherence Tomography, Corneal Swelling, Contact Lenses, Corneal Pachymetry

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Introduction: Corneal thickness measurement is an indirect assessment of the physiological corneal function in human eye. This value, especially in the central area, is an important data for clinical diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of anterior segment pathologies. There are several technologies for non-invasively measuring corneal thickness like optical coherence tomography (OCT). However, there is little information available describing the effect of contact lens induced corneal swelling in OCT measures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the repeatability of OCT corneal pachymetry in eyes with and without contact lens induced corneal swelling. Material and Methods: This study included five visits over one week in six healthy subjects: baseline and after sleeping with four different CL of +0.50 D, +2.00 D, +5.00 D and +8.00 D (Acuvue 2, Johnson & Johnson Vision Care) on four different days. Corneal pachymetry OCT 3D (Topcon) were measured three consecutive times during each visit. Besides, this measurement was repeated in 12 meridians (Scans #1 to #12), between 0°and 165°with 15° intervals. Results: Corneal pachymetry was significant different between before and after contact lens wear (p < 0.001 ANOVA). High repeatability was found without corneal swelling [Coefficient of variation (CV) = 0.68% p = 0.93] and with corneal swelling [CL -0.50 D (CV = 0.78% p = 0.95; 590 ± 46 μm CI 95% 548 to 596), with CL + 2.00 D (CV = 0.72% p = 0.97; 601 ± 46 μm CI 95% 595 to 607), with CL + 5.00 D (CV = 0.78% p = 0.66; 608 ± 50 μm CI 95% 601 to 615) and with CL + 8.00 D (CV = 0.77% p = 0.97; 607 ± 44 μm CI 95% 601 to 613)]. There were no differences (p = 1.00) in central corneal thickness along the 12 scans corneal [Scan #0 (593 ± 50 μm CI 95% 582 to 603), #1 (592 ± 50 μm CI 95% 581 to 603), #2 (591 ± 50 μm IC 95% 580 to 602), #3 (590 ± 49 μm CI 95% 579 to 600), #4 (590 ± 50 μm CI 95% 579 to 600), #5 (591 ± 50 μm CI 95% 581 to 602), #6 (590 ± 51 μm CI 95% 580 to 601), #7 (589 ± 50 μm CI 95% 578 to 600), #8 (590 ± 50 μm CI 95% 579 to 600), #9 (589 ± 50 μm CI 95% 579 to 600), #10 (592 ± 50 μm CI 95% 581 to 602) and #11 (591 ± 50 μm CI 95% 580 to 601).

References

[1]  F. W. Price Jr., D. L. Koller and M. O. Price, “Central Corneal Pachymetry in Patients Undergoing Laser in Situ Keratomileusis,” Ophtalmology, Vol. 106, No. 11, 1999, pp. 2216-2220.
[2]  M. Doors, L. P. Cruysberg, T. T. Berendschot, J. de Brabander, F. Verbaket, C. A. Webers and R. M. Nuijts, “Comparison of Central Corneal Thickness and Anterior Chamber Depth Measurements Using Three Imaging Technologies in Normal Eyes and after Phakic Intraocular Lens Implantation,” Graefes Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, Vol. 247, No. 8, 2009, pp. 1139-1146.
[3]  H. Cheng, A. K. Bates, L. Wood and K. McPherson, “Positive Correlation of Corneal Thickness and Endothelial Cell Loss. Serial Measurements after Cataract Surgery,” Arch Ophtalmology, Vol. 106, No. 7, 1988, pp. 920-922. doi:10.1001/archopht.1988.01060140066026
[4]  K. Dumbleton, “Adverse Events with Silicone Hydrogel Continuous Wear,” Contact Lens & Anterior Eye, Vol. 25, No. 3, 2002, pp. 137-146. doi:10.1016/S1367-0484(02)00009-7
[5]  R. Martin, V. de Juan, G. Rodriguez, et al., “Measurement of Corneal Swelling Variations without Removal of the Contact Lens during Extended Wear,” Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Vol. 48, No. 7, 2007, pp. 3043-3050. doi:10.1167/iovs.06-1372
[6]  N. Hutchings, T. L. Simpson, C. Hyun, A. A. Moayed, et al., “Swelling of the Human Cornea Revealed by HighSpeed, Ultrahight-Resolution Optical Coherence Tomography,” Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Vol. 9, No. 51, 2010, pp. 4579-4584.
[7]  M. Doors, T. T. Berendschot, J. de Brabander, et al., “Value of Optical Coherence Tomography for Anterior Segment Surgery,” Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery, Vol. 36, No. 7, 2010, pp. 1213-1229. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.05.002
[8]  J. A. Izatt, M. Hee, E. A. Swanson, et al., “MicrometerScale Resolution Imaging of the Anterior Eye in Vivo with Optical Coherence Tomography,” Archives of Ophthalmology, Vol. 112, No. 12, 1994, pp. 1584-1589. doi:10.1001/archopht.1994.01090240090031
[9]  J. L. B. Ramos, Y. Li and D. Huang, “Clinical and Research Applications of Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography—A Review,” Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2009, pp. 81-89. doi:10.1111/j.1442-9071.2008.01823.x
[10]  A. F. Fercher, W. Drexler, C. K. Hitzenberger and T. Lasser, “Optical Coherence Tomography—Principles and Applications,” Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 66, No. 2, 2003, pp. 239-303. doi:10.1088/0034-4885/66/2/204
[11]  M. J. González-Méijome, A. Cervino, E. Yebra-Pimentel, et al., “Central and Peripheral Corneal Thickness Measurement with Orbscan II and Topographical Ultrasound Pachymetry,” Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery, Vol. 29, No. 1, 2003, pp. 125-132. doi:10.1016/S0886-3350(02)01815-1
[12]  N. Efron, “Contact Lens Complications,” 2nd Edition, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2004.
[13]  F. Scholomit, B. A. Sandler, R. Joseph, M. O. Zelefsky, M. D. Syrili Dorairaj, et al., “Intra-observer and InterObserver Reliability and Reproductibility of Slit-LampAdapted Optical Coherence Tomography for Evaluation of Anterior Chamber Depth and Central Corneal Thickness,” Ophtalmic Surgery, Lasers & Imaging, Vol. 39, No. 4, 2008, pp. 299-303.
[14]  A. Agarwal, D. Ashokkumar, S. Jacob and Y. Saravaman, “High-Speed Optical Coherence Tomography for Imaging Anterior Chamber Inflammatory Reaction in Uveitis: Clinical Correlation and Grading,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. 147, No. 3, 2009, pp. 413-416. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2008.09.024
[15]  J. Thomas, J. Wang, A. M. Rollins and J. Sturm, “Comparison of Corneal Thickness Measured with Optical Coherence Tomography, Ultrasonic Pachymetry and a Scanning Slit Method,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, Vol. 7, No. 22, 2006, pp. 671-678.
[16]  R. B. Kucumen, N. H. Yenerel, E. Gorgun, D. Oral, et al, “As OCT as a Tool for Flap Thickness Measurement after Femtosecond-Assisted LASIK,” Ophtalmic Surgery, Lasers & Imaging, Vol. 42, No. 1, 2011, pp. 31-36.
[17]  D. M. Harvitt and J. A. Bonanno, “Re-Evaluation of the Oxygen Diffusion Model for Predicting Minimum Contact Lens Dk/t Values Needed to Avoid Corneal Anoxia,” Optometry & Vision Science, Vol. 76, No. 10, 1999, pp. 712-719.

Full-Text

comments powered by Disqus

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

微信:OALib Journal