Premium
Structural and biomechanical corneal differences between patients suffering from primary congenital glaucoma and healthy volunteers
Author(s) -
PeruchoGonzález Lucía,
SáenzFrancés Federico,
MoralesFernández Laura,
MartínezdelaCasa José María,
MéndezHernández Carmen D.,
SantosBueso Enrique,
Brookes John L.,
GarcíaFeijoó Julián
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
acta ophthalmologica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.534
H-Index - 87
eISSN - 1755-3768
pISSN - 1755-375X
DOI - 10.1111/aos.13212
Subject(s) - confidence interval , medicine , receiver operating characteristic , ophthalmology , odds ratio , logistic regression , glaucoma , area under the curve , cornea
Purpose To determine whether a set of ocular morphometric and biomechanical variables are able to discriminate between healthy volunteers and patients suffering from primary congenital glaucoma ( PCG ). Methods Case–control study in which 66 patients with PCG and 94 age‐matched healthy subjects were evaluated using ocular response analyser ( ORA ) to record corneal biomechanical properties. Topographic corneal variables were obtained using the Pentacam in both groups. To determine the ability to discern between both groups, a multivariate binary logistic model was constructed. The outcome was the diagnosis of PCG and the predictors; the corneal variables analysed along with their first‐term interactions. Sensitivity and specificity of this model along with the area under the receiver characteristic operating curve ( AUC of ROC ) were determined. Results The best model to discriminate between both groups included the following predictors: corneal hysteresis ( CH ), corneal resistance factor ( CRF ), posterior maximum elevation ( PME ), anterior maximum elevation ( AME ) and central corneal thickness ( CCT ). This model, for a cut‐point of 50%, presents a sensitivity of 86.67%, a specificity of 86.89% and an AUC of the ROC curve of 93.16% [95% confidence interval (CI) : 88.97–97.35]. The adjusted odds ratios of those predictors which showed a significant discriminating capacity were as follows: for CH , 0.27 (95% confidence interval: 0.15–0.46); for CRF , 2.13 (95% CI : 1.33–3.40); for PME , 1.06 (95% CI : 1.01–1.12); and for AME , 1.35 (95% CI : 1.10–1.66). Conclusion Corneal hysteresis (CH), CRF , PME and AME are able to discern between patients with PCG and healthy controls. This fact suggests that there are structural and biomechanical differences between these groups.