Ocular response analyzer (ORA) derived parameters compared to Sirius corneal topography in analyzing corneal pathology
| العنوان: | Ocular response analyzer (ORA) derived parameters compared to Sirius corneal topography in analyzing corneal pathology |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Tania A. Baban, Haitham Muhidine El Ballouz, Elias L. Warrak, Fady K. Sammouh |
| المصدر: | Indian Journal of Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology. 2:169 |
| بيانات النشر: | Diva Enterprises Private Limited, 2016. |
| سنة النشر: | 2016 |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: | Pathology, medicine.medical_specialty, Keratoconus, Intraocular pressure, genetic structures, medicine.diagnostic_test, business.industry, medicine.medical_treatment, Sirius, Disease classification, Corneal topography, medicine.disease, eye diseases, Neuro-ophthalmology, medicine.anatomical_structure, Refractive surgery, Cornea, medicine, sense organs, business |
| الوصف: | Purpose: To evaluate the ability of Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) to differentiate between normal and abnormal corneas as compared to Sirius corneal topography. Methods: This retrospective study included 302 eyes of 151 patients. All patients underwent evaluation with ORA and Sirius corneal topography. Parameters included disease classification results on both instruments (device software classification), Surface asymmetry index (SAI) on Sirius, Corneal Hysteresis (CH), Corneal Resistant Factor (CRF), Keratoconus Match Index (KMI), Goldmann-correlated intraocular pressure (IOPg), Corneal compensated intraocular pressure (IOPcc) and waveform score (WS) on ORA. Results: On Sirius, 198 eyes (65.6%) were classified as normal. On ORA, 121 eyes (40.1%) were documented as normal. Overall, 105 eyes (34.8%) were classified as normal and 88 eyes (29.1%) with non-normal classification on both Sirius and ORA. Of the 198 eyes classified as normal on Sirius, 53% were classified as normal, 39% as suspect and 8% as mild keratoconus on ORA (47% non-normal). Of the 121 eyes classified as normal on ORA, 87% were classified as normal, 6% as suspect, and 2% as keratoconus compatible on Sirius (13% non-normal). Four percent of the eyes classified as keratoconus compatible on Sirius were classified as normal on ORA. There was a significant difference when comparing normal and non-normal classifications between ORA and Sirius (p < 0.001) with poor agreement (Kappa=0.32). When including only normal and Keratoconus eyes in the analysis, good agreement was found between the two machines (Kappa=0.75). Conclusion: According to our results there seems to be a significant difference between ORA and Sirius in their ability to differentiate between normal and non-normal eyes. As such, we recommend that these devices not to be used interchangeably for assessing patients prior to refractive surgery. Keywords: Cornea; Corneal biomechanics; Keratoconus; Ocular response analyzer; Sirius corneal topo |
| تدمد: | 2395-1451 2395-1443 |
| الوصول الحر: | https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::a16c3755965c970014b351f4bef07695Test https://doi.org/10.5958/2395-1451.2016.00037.8Test |
| رقم الانضمام: | edsair.doi...........a16c3755965c970014b351f4bef07695 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | OpenAIRE |
| تدمد: | 23951451 23951443 |
|---|