April 2010
Volume 51, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2010
Corneal Diameter Analysis Using External Photography
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • G. M. Notz
    Ophthalmology, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania
  • K. C. Dimiceli
    Ophthalmology, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania
  • M. Stahl
    Ophthalmology, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania
  • T. W. Wilson
    Ophthalmology, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania
  • A. V. Levin
    Department of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, Wills Eye Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  G.M. Notz, None; K.C. Dimiceli, None; M. Stahl, None; T.W. Wilson, None; A.V. Levin, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2010, Vol.51, 6307. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      G. M. Notz, K. C. Dimiceli, M. Stahl, T. W. Wilson, A. V. Levin; Corneal Diameter Analysis Using External Photography. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2010;51(13):6307.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Measuring corneal diameter with calipers has been the gold standard.The purpose of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of twotechniques to measure corneal diameter: standard calipers andcorneal rings versus digital photography.


We developed a corneal diameter model card which included precisecircles of corresponding diameter in millimeter and a rulerfor control. Pediatric and adult patients were measured usingcalipers. Diameters were also recorded for the corneal ringwhich most closely approximates the dimension of the limbuswhen held in front of cornea. Digital photographs were takenwith model cards held at the plane of the cornea. Corneal diameterwas measured comparing corneal images to standard circles andthe control ruler. Data was de-identified and separated suchthat the caliper and ring measurements and photographic measurementswere recorded by separate investigators at separate times inorder to prevent bias.


Statistical analysis has been initiated. We have compared caliperand ring measurements experimentally and ruler and model cardcircles photographically. 100% of photographic measurementsbetween ruler and model card circles are within 0.5mm of eachother, 95% CI [88%-100%]. 87% of experimental caliper and cornealring measurements are within 0.5mm, 95% CI[69%-96%]. N= 30.


Initial results demonstrate that our external photographic designis accurate when comparing ruler and model card circle measurements.Using external photography could facilitate accurate and moreeasily obtainable corneal measurements in young or uncooperativepatients.  


Keywords: cornea: clinical science • anatomy • imaging/image analysis: clinical 

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.