May 2006
Volume 47, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2006
Pentacam Analysis of Keratoconus Indices in Normal Patients
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • S.V. Quisling
    Ophthalmology, University of Iowa, Iowa, IA
  • K. Goins
    Ophthalmology, University of Iowa, Iowa, IA
  • J. Sutphin
    Ophthalmology, University of Iowa, Iowa, IA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  S.V. Quisling, None; K. Goins, None; J. Sutphin, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2006, Vol.47, 1360. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      S.V. Quisling, K. Goins, J. Sutphin; Pentacam Analysis of Keratoconus Indices in Normal Patients . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006;47(13):1360.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : Topographic criteria for the diagnosis of Keratoconus are controversial. Pattern recognition by an experienced observer is sensitive in detecting abnormalities, but there remains a need for an automated detection program. The newest version of the Oculus Pentacam contains software with a keratoconus classification system based on indices that are compared to mean values and standard deviations of a normal population.

Methods: : Retrospective analysis of keratoconus indices and keratoconus classification of pre–operative Pentacam topography obtained on 29 normal patients subsequently had uncomplicated lasik surgery from 4/04 to 10/05. The scans were prior to the installation of the keratoconus software and not included in the pre–operative evaluation. The topography was re–examined with respect to the keratoconus indices. For 36 Pentacam scans, the mean for the keratoconus indices used by Pentacam for keratoconus classification and specificity for the keratoconus classification system were calculated.

Results: : Twenty–two percent of the normal pre–operative scans had KK1 classification, 3% scans had KK1–2 classification. Specificity of the test was calculated to be 75% based on less than KK2 classification, but was 100% for KK3. Index of surface variance had a mean value of 27.89 with 3% having an abnormal index (>37) and 3% having a pathological index (>41). For the keratoconus Index, the mean value was 1.03 with 25% with abnormal index (>1.07). For the Radii minimum, the mean value was 7.15 with 3% having an abnormal index (<6.71).

Conclusions: : The value of these systems or classifications has yet to be determined. From this data on "normal" patients, we can say that the Pentacam software for keratoconus classification specificity of 75% based on less than KK2 classification, but was 100% for KK3. The low specificity will lead to many false–positive results and further evaluation of the criteria will be necessary in order to use this system in the screening of keratoconus especially in presumed normal patients to avoid over diagnosing forme fruste keratoconus.

Keywords: refractive surgery: corneal topography • refractive surgery: LASIK 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×