Premium
Interpretation of keratoconus indices
Author(s) -
Eppig T.,
SpiraEppig C.,
Szentmáry N.,
Langenbucher A.
Publication year - 2016
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/j.1755-3768.2016.0197
Subject(s) - scheimpflug principle , keratoconus , ectasia , ophthalmology , optometry , metric (unit) , cornea , chart , medicine , corneal topography , computer science , optics , mathematics , surgery , physics , statistics , engineering , operations management
Summary We provide an overview on the dedicated keratoconus indices of Pentacam (Scheimpflug‐based tomographer), CASIA SS‐1000 (anterior segment optical coherence tomographer), TMS‐5 (Scheimpflug and Placido tomo‐/topographer) and Ocular Response Analyzer (pneumotonometer which features measurement of biomechanical properties). We demonstrate how modern keratoconus screening software modules such as the Belin‐Ambrósio Enhanced Ectasia Display (BAD) or the ectasia screening of the CASIA/TMS‐5 work in comparison to the classical McDonnell/Rabinowitz and Smolek/Klyce/Maede indices, and we point out the differences between metric keratoconus indices and classificators. We will also discuss the diagnostic capacity of the devices and indices/classificators in detail.