The purpose of this research was to compare the ability of Scheimpflug and anterior segment optical coherence tomography (OCT) in detecting subclinical corneal edema in patients with Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) without clinical corneal edema. Methods:In this single-center, consecutive case series, 47 eyes of 29 patients with FECD were analyzed. The main outcome measures were anterior/posterior keratometry and central/thinnest corneal thickness. The criteria for subclinical corneal edema were loss of regular isopachs, displacement of the thinnest point of the cornea, and presence of posterior surface depression. Tomographic analyses were performed using Scheimpflug imaging (Pentacam HR) and OCT (anterior segment swept-source optical coherence tomography). Results:The measurement of the continuous variables revealed a significant difference between the 2 devices. The anterior curvature was steeper and the posterior curvature was flatter when measured with OCT (P , 0.001). The OCT showed a lower central corneal thickness and thinnest corneal thickness (P , 0.001). The agreement between both devices to detect subclinical corneal edema was high.The interdevice reliability for loss of parallel isopachs as measured by Cohen kappa coefficient was 0.84; for the displacement of the thinnest point of the cornea, it was 0.6, and for the focal posterior corneal surface depression, it was 0.62. Subclinical corneal edema was detected in 72.3% of the patients with both devices. In only 2 cases (4.3%), subclinical corneal edema was detected by one of the devices.Conclusions: Scheimpflug and OCT imaging were both able to detect tomographic patterns of subclinical corneal edema. Therefore, both devices can help decision-making, favoring early endothelial keratoplasty in symptomatic patients with FECD without clinical corneal edema.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.