RESUMO
PURPOSE: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of anterior and posterior corneal elevation parameters as determined by Orbscan II (Bausch and Lomb, Rochester, NY, USA) in discriminating between (sub) clinical keratoconus (KCN) and normal corneas. METHODS: This prospective case-control study included 28 eyes with subclinical KCN, 65 with clinical KCN and 141 normal corneas. Anterior and posterior corneal elevation was measured and compared in the central 5-mm corneal zone using Orbscan II. RESULTS: Receiver operating curves (ROC) curve analyses for posterior corneal elevation showed predictive accuracy in both KCN and subclinical KCN with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.97 and 0.69, respectively while optimal cutoff points were 51 µm for KCN and 35 µm for subclinical KCN. These values were associated with sensitivity and specificity of 89.23% and 98.58%, respectively, for KCN; and 50.00% and 88.65% for subclinical KCN. ROC curve analyses for anterior corneal elevation showed predictive accuracy in both KCN and subclinical KCN with AUC of 0.97 and 0.69, respectively while optimal cutoff points were 19 µm for KCN and 16 µm for subclinical KCN. These values were associated with sensitivity and specificity of 93.85% and 97.16%, respectively, for KCN; and 60.71% and 87.94% for subclinical KCN. CONCLUSION: Anterior and posterior corneal elevation data obtained by Orbscan II can well discriminate between KCN and normal corneas, however the reliability of their indices is lower in differentiating subclinical KCN from normal cases.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To assess the agreement among ultrasonic pachymetry, the Galilei dual Scheimpflug analyzer, and Orbscan II for central and peripheral (Galilei vs. Orbscan) corneal thickness (CCT and PCT) measurement in normal and keratoconic eyes. METHODS: In this prospective study, CCT and PCT were measured in 88 eyes of 88 refractive surgery candidates and 128 eyes of 69 keratoconic patients with ultrasonic pachymetry, the Galilei, and Orbscan II. The readings by the three instruments were compared using one-way analysis of normal variance. Agreement among the three devices was assessed using Pearson and intraclass correlation coefficients, and Bland-Altman plots. The same analyses were employed to evaluate agreement between Galilei and Orbscan II for PCT measurement. RESULTS: In the normal group, mean CCT was 551.0±39.4, 566.9±33.5, and 565.5±40.9 µm measured by ultrasonic pachymetry, the Galilei, and Orbscan II, respectively (P<0.001). The corresponding figures in the keratoconus group were 492.0±61.7, 502.0±42.1, and 470.6±56.9 µm, respectively (P<0.001). Mean PCT was 612.5±35.3 and 640.9±38.0 µm in the normal group (P<0.001) and 567.6±35.2 and 595.1±41.4 µm in the keratoconus group (P<0.001) by the Galilei and Orbscan II, respectively. CCT and PCT measurements obtained by different devices were significantly correlated in both groups. CONCLUSION: To measure CCT, the Galilei and Orbscan II can be used interchangeably in normal eyes, but not in keratoconic eyes. For PCT, there is a systematic error between measurements obtained by the Galilei and Orbscan II. However, it is possible to change optical pachymeter readings into those obtained by ultrasonic pachymetry using a constant.
