May 2003
Volume 44, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2003
In-vivo Comparison of Corneal Thickness as Measured with the Ultrasound Pachymeter and the Confocal Biomicroscope
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • K.D. Kanitkar
    Medical Education, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, United States
  • S.B. Hannush
    Cornea, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, United States
  • C. Halfpenny
    Cornea, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  K.D. Kanitkar, None; S.B. Hannush, None; C. Halfpenny, None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2003, Vol.44, 3660. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      K.D. Kanitkar, S.B. Hannush, C. Halfpenny; In-vivo Comparison of Corneal Thickness as Measured with the Ultrasound Pachymeter and the Confocal Biomicroscope . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2003;44(13):3660.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Abstract: : Purpose: To compare confocal microscopy-derived corneal thickness measurements in normal eyes with standard ultrasound pachymetry. Methods: Ten normal eyes of five patients underwent measurement of central corneal thickness with the DGH 5100 ultrasound pachymeter. These eyes were then analyzed with the ConfoScan3 confocal microscope. Pachymetry was derived by averaging the distance between the first endothelial image and the last epithelial image over multiple passes. Results: The Confoscan3-derived pachymetry averaged 22 microns (4%) thinner than ultrasound pachymetry, with a standard deviation of 29 microns. Conclusions: The confocal biomicroscope presents another option for measuring corneal thickness. Our study demonstrates that ConfoScan3-derived pachymetry is, on average, slightly thinner than that of the DGH 5100 ultrasound pachymeter. In the absence of a standard of reference, either technology may more accurately measure corneal thickness.

Keywords: microscopy: confocal/tunneling • imaging methods (CT, FA, ICG, MRI, OCT, RTA, S • cornea: basic science 
×
×

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.

×