ORA waveform-derived biomechanical parameters to distinguish normal from keratoconic eyes
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2013 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0004-27492013000200011 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/7701 |
Resumo: | PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA; Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Buffalo, NY) to distinguish between normal and keratoconic eyes, by comparing pressure and waveform signal-derived parameters. METHODS: This retrospective comparative case series study included 112 patients with normal corneas and 41 patients with bilateral keratoconic eyes. One eye from each subject was randomly selected for analysis. Keratoconus diagnosis was based on clinical examinations, including Placido disk-based corneal topography and rotating Scheimpflug corneal tomography. Data from the ORA best waveform score (WS) measurements were extracted using ORA software. Corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), Goldman-correlated intraocular pressure (IOPg), cornea-compensated intraocular pressure (IOPcc), and 37 parameters derived from the waveform signal were analyzed. Differences in the distributions among the groups were assessed using the Mann-Whitney test. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences between keratoconic and normal eyes were found in all parameters (p<0.05) except IOPcc and W1. The area under the ROC curve (AUROC) was greater than 0.85 for 11 parameters, including CH (0.852) and CRF (0.895). The parameters related to the area under the waveform peak during the second and first applanations (p2area and p1area) had the best performances, with AUROCs of 0.939 and 0.929, respectively. The AUROCs for CRF, p2area, and p1area were significantly greater than that for CH. CONCLUSION: There are significant differences in biomechanical metrics between normal and keratoconic eyes. Compared with the pressure-derived parameters, corneal hysteresis and corneal resistance factor, novel waveform-derived ORA parameters provide better identification of keratoconus. |
id |
UFSP_62bed8f3fc3f22f511c622472e293a30 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/7701 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
repository_id_str |
3465 |
spelling |
ORA waveform-derived biomechanical parameters to distinguish normal from keratoconic eyesParâmetros biomecânicos derivados da forma da curva do ORA para discriminar olhos normais de ceratoconesCorneaKeratoconusCorneal diseasesRefractive surgical proceduresSoftwareBiomechanicsCórneaCeratoconeDoenças da córneaProcedimentos cirúrgicos refrativosSoftwareBiomecânicaPURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA; Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Buffalo, NY) to distinguish between normal and keratoconic eyes, by comparing pressure and waveform signal-derived parameters. METHODS: This retrospective comparative case series study included 112 patients with normal corneas and 41 patients with bilateral keratoconic eyes. One eye from each subject was randomly selected for analysis. Keratoconus diagnosis was based on clinical examinations, including Placido disk-based corneal topography and rotating Scheimpflug corneal tomography. Data from the ORA best waveform score (WS) measurements were extracted using ORA software. Corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), Goldman-correlated intraocular pressure (IOPg), cornea-compensated intraocular pressure (IOPcc), and 37 parameters derived from the waveform signal were analyzed. Differences in the distributions among the groups were assessed using the Mann-Whitney test. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences between keratoconic and normal eyes were found in all parameters (p<0.05) except IOPcc and W1. The area under the ROC curve (AUROC) was greater than 0.85 for 11 parameters, including CH (0.852) and CRF (0.895). The parameters related to the area under the waveform peak during the second and first applanations (p2area and p1area) had the best performances, with AUROCs of 0.939 and 0.929, respectively. The AUROCs for CRF, p2area, and p1area were significantly greater than that for CH. CONCLUSION: There are significant differences in biomechanical metrics between normal and keratoconic eyes. Compared with the pressure-derived parameters, corneal hysteresis and corneal resistance factor, novel waveform-derived ORA parameters provide better identification of keratoconus.OBJETIVO: Avaliar a capacidade do Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA; Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Buffalo, NY) em discriminar olhos com ceratocone de olhos normais e comparar parâmetros derivados da pressão dos parâmetros derivados da forma da curva. MÉTODOS:Estudo comparativo retrospectivo série de casos que incluiu 112 pacientes com olhos normais e 41 pacientes com ceratocone bilateral. Um olho de cada indivíduo foi randomicamente selecionado para análise. O diagnóstico de ceratocone foi baseado em exame clínico, incluindo topografia de Plácido e tomografia Scheimpflug. Informação do melhor waveform score foi extraída do software do ORA. Histerese corneana (CH), fator de resistência corneana (CRF), pressão intraocular correlacionada com Goldman (IOPg), pressão intraocular compensada pela córnea (IOPcc) e 37 novos parâmetros derivados da forma da curva do sinal do ORA foram analisados. Diferenças nas distribuições dos grupos foram avaliadas pelo teste Mann-Whitney. Curvas ROC foram calculadas. RESULTADOS: Diferenças estatisticamente significantes foram encontradas entre os olhos normais e ceratocones em todos os parâmetros (p<0,05) salvo IOPcc e W1. A área sob a curva ROC (AUROC) foi maior que 0.85 em 11 parâmetros, incluindo CH (0,852) a CRF (0,895). Os parâmetros relacionados com a área sob o pico da forma de onda durante a segunda e primeira aplanação (p2area e p1area) obtiveram as melhores performances, com AUROCs de 0,939 e 0,929, respectivamente. Os valores de AUROCs do fator de resistência corneana, p2area e p1area foram significativamente maiores que os valores de histerese corneana. CONCLUSÃO: Existem diferenças significantes nas medidas biomecânicas entre olhos normais e com ceratocone. Comparados com os parâmetros derivados da pressão, histerese corneana e fator de resistência corneana, os parâmetros derivados da forma da curva proporcionaram melhor identificação dos ceratocones.Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) Department for OphthalmologyHospital de Olhos de SergipeInstituto de Olhos Renato AmbrósioUNIFESP, Department for OphthalmologySciELOConselho Brasileiro de OftalmologiaUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Hospital de Olhos de SergipeInstituto de Olhos Renato AmbrósioLuz, Allan [UNIFESP]Fontes, Bruno Machado [UNIFESP]Lopes, BernardoRamos, IsaacSchor, Paulo [UNIFESP]Ambrósio Jr., Renato [UNIFESP]2015-06-14T13:45:22Z2015-06-14T13:45:22Z2013-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion111-117application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0004-27492013000200011Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia. Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia, v. 76, n. 2, p. 111-117, 2013.10.1590/S0004-27492013000200011S0004-27492013000200011.pdf0004-2749S0004-27492013000200011http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/7701engArquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologiainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESPinstname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)instacron:UNIFESP2024-08-05T06:37:53Zoai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/7701Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.unifesp.br/oai/requestbiblioteca.csp@unifesp.bropendoar:34652024-08-05T06:37:53Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
ORA waveform-derived biomechanical parameters to distinguish normal from keratoconic eyes Parâmetros biomecânicos derivados da forma da curva do ORA para discriminar olhos normais de ceratocones |
title |
ORA waveform-derived biomechanical parameters to distinguish normal from keratoconic eyes |
spellingShingle |
ORA waveform-derived biomechanical parameters to distinguish normal from keratoconic eyes Luz, Allan [UNIFESP] Cornea Keratoconus Corneal diseases Refractive surgical procedures Software Biomechanics Córnea Ceratocone Doenças da córnea Procedimentos cirúrgicos refrativos Software Biomecânica |
title_short |
ORA waveform-derived biomechanical parameters to distinguish normal from keratoconic eyes |
title_full |
ORA waveform-derived biomechanical parameters to distinguish normal from keratoconic eyes |
title_fullStr |
ORA waveform-derived biomechanical parameters to distinguish normal from keratoconic eyes |
title_full_unstemmed |
ORA waveform-derived biomechanical parameters to distinguish normal from keratoconic eyes |
title_sort |
ORA waveform-derived biomechanical parameters to distinguish normal from keratoconic eyes |
author |
Luz, Allan [UNIFESP] |
author_facet |
Luz, Allan [UNIFESP] Fontes, Bruno Machado [UNIFESP] Lopes, Bernardo Ramos, Isaac Schor, Paulo [UNIFESP] Ambrósio Jr., Renato [UNIFESP] |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Fontes, Bruno Machado [UNIFESP] Lopes, Bernardo Ramos, Isaac Schor, Paulo [UNIFESP] Ambrósio Jr., Renato [UNIFESP] |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) Hospital de Olhos de Sergipe Instituto de Olhos Renato Ambrósio |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Luz, Allan [UNIFESP] Fontes, Bruno Machado [UNIFESP] Lopes, Bernardo Ramos, Isaac Schor, Paulo [UNIFESP] Ambrósio Jr., Renato [UNIFESP] |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Cornea Keratoconus Corneal diseases Refractive surgical procedures Software Biomechanics Córnea Ceratocone Doenças da córnea Procedimentos cirúrgicos refrativos Software Biomecânica |
topic |
Cornea Keratoconus Corneal diseases Refractive surgical procedures Software Biomechanics Córnea Ceratocone Doenças da córnea Procedimentos cirúrgicos refrativos Software Biomecânica |
description |
PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA; Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Buffalo, NY) to distinguish between normal and keratoconic eyes, by comparing pressure and waveform signal-derived parameters. METHODS: This retrospective comparative case series study included 112 patients with normal corneas and 41 patients with bilateral keratoconic eyes. One eye from each subject was randomly selected for analysis. Keratoconus diagnosis was based on clinical examinations, including Placido disk-based corneal topography and rotating Scheimpflug corneal tomography. Data from the ORA best waveform score (WS) measurements were extracted using ORA software. Corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), Goldman-correlated intraocular pressure (IOPg), cornea-compensated intraocular pressure (IOPcc), and 37 parameters derived from the waveform signal were analyzed. Differences in the distributions among the groups were assessed using the Mann-Whitney test. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences between keratoconic and normal eyes were found in all parameters (p<0.05) except IOPcc and W1. The area under the ROC curve (AUROC) was greater than 0.85 for 11 parameters, including CH (0.852) and CRF (0.895). The parameters related to the area under the waveform peak during the second and first applanations (p2area and p1area) had the best performances, with AUROCs of 0.939 and 0.929, respectively. The AUROCs for CRF, p2area, and p1area were significantly greater than that for CH. CONCLUSION: There are significant differences in biomechanical metrics between normal and keratoconic eyes. Compared with the pressure-derived parameters, corneal hysteresis and corneal resistance factor, novel waveform-derived ORA parameters provide better identification of keratoconus. |
publishDate |
2013 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2013-04-01 2015-06-14T13:45:22Z 2015-06-14T13:45:22Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0004-27492013000200011 Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia. Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia, v. 76, n. 2, p. 111-117, 2013. 10.1590/S0004-27492013000200011 S0004-27492013000200011.pdf 0004-2749 S0004-27492013000200011 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/7701 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0004-27492013000200011 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/7701 |
identifier_str_mv |
Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia. Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia, v. 76, n. 2, p. 111-117, 2013. 10.1590/S0004-27492013000200011 S0004-27492013000200011.pdf 0004-2749 S0004-27492013000200011 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
111-117 application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP instname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) instacron:UNIFESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
instacron_str |
UNIFESP |
institution |
UNIFESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
biblioteca.csp@unifesp.br |
_version_ |
1814268293448466432 |