Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Investigation of corneal biomechanics at moderate to high refractive errors

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) are corneal biomechanical parameters which were measured by ocular response analyzer (ORA). Aim of this study was to define the CH and CRF in high myopic and hyperopic patients and compare the results with emmetropic control group.

Methods

A total of 193 eyes of 100 healthy volunteers were included. Study groups were high myopic patients (n = 27) with spherical refractive errors (SRE) of greater than −5.00D, high hyperopic patients (n = 20) with SRE of greater than +3.00D and controls (n = 53) with SRE between ± 1.00D. All subjects underwent IOP and corneal biomechanical evaluation with the ORA. Also Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), central corneal thickness (CCT), corneal curvature and axial length measurements were taken.

Results

Mean age of groups was 30.7 ± 6.9, 29.1 ± 7.7, 28.9 ± 5.6 years (p > 0.05). Among study groups except CRF and CCT, all parameters were significantly different between study groups. CH was lowest in the high myopic group and highest in the high hyperopia. In all groups, there were significant correlations between CH and CRF, CCT, SRE, SE (spherical equivalent), AL (axial length) and between CRF and CCT. GAT and IOPg (Goldmann-correlated intraocular pressure) measurements were significantly correlated with CCT (p < 0.05). One of the major findings was as the CH approaches 11.2 mmHg, IOPcc (corneal-compensated intraocular pressure) and IOPg get close to each other.

Conclusions

The results revealed that CRF is not affected by refractive errors and IOPcc is not affected by any other ocular parameter. The difference between IOPcc and IOPg was greatest in myopic group, and IOP (intraocular pressure) measurement in these patients deserves high suspicion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schneider Julie, Leeder SR, Gopinath B, Wang JJ, Mitchell P (2010) Frequency, Course, and Impact of Correctable Visual Impairment (Uncorrected Refractive Error). Surv Ophthalmol 55:539–560

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ip JM, Huynh SC, Kifley A et al (2007) Variation of the contribution from AL and other oculometric parameters to refraction by age and ethnicity. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 48:4846–4853

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lin LL, Shih YF, Tsai CB et al (1999) Epidemiologic study of ocular refraction among schoolchildren in Taiwan in 1995. Optom Vis Sci 76:275–281

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Fotedar R, Wang JJ, Burlutsky G et al (2010) Distribution of AL and ocular biometry measured using partial coherence laser interferometry (IOL Master) in an older white population. Ophthalmology 117:417–423

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Olsen T, Arnarsson A, Sasaki H, Sasaki K, Jonasson F (2007) On the ocular refractive components: the Reykjavik Eye Study. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 85:361–366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. McBrien NA, Adams DW (1997) A longitudinal investigation of adult-onset and adult- progression of myopia in an occupational group. Refractive and biometric findings. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 38:321–333

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Phillips JR, McBrien NA (1995) Form deprivation myopia: elastic properties of sclera. Ophthal Physiol Opt 15:357–362

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. McBrien NA, Jobling AI, Gentle A (2009) Biomechanics of the sclera in myopia: extracellular and cellular factors. Optom Vis Sci 86:23–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Avetisov ES, Savitskaya NF, Vinetskaya MI et al (1983) A study of biochemical and biomechanical qualities of normal and myopic eye sclera in humans of different age groups. Metab Pediatr Syst Ophthalmol 7:183–188

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ip JM, Huynh SC, Robaei D et al (2008) Ethnic differences in refraction and ocular biometry in a population-based sample of 11–15-year-old Australian children. Eye (Lond) 22:649–656

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Luce DA (2005) Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer. J Cataract Refract Surg 31:156–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lim L, Gazzard G, Chan YH et al (2008) Cornea biomechanical characteristics and their correlates with refractive error in Singaporean children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 49:3852–3857

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Shen M, Fan F, Xue A, Wang J, Zhou X, Lu F (2008) Biomechanical properties of the cornea in high myopia. Vision Res 48:2167–2171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. He M, Huang W, Li Y, Zheng Y, Yin Q, Foster PJ (2009) Refractive error and biometry in older Chinese adults: the Liwan eye study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 50:5130–5136

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Xie R, Zhou XT, Lu F et al (2009) Correlation between myopia and major biometric parameters of the eye: a retrospective clinical study. Optom Vis Sci 86:503–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Steinberg J, Frings A, Mousli A, Casagrande MK, Druchkiv V, Katz T, Linke SJ (2016) New Scheimpflug dynamic In Vivo curve analyses to characterize biomechanical changes of the cornea after cross-linking for progressive keratoconus. J Refract Surg 32(1):34–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Frings A, Linke SJ, Bauer EL, Druchkiv V, Katz T, Steinberg J (2015) Effects of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) on corneal biomechanical measurements with the Corvis ST tonometer. Clin Ophthalmol 12(9):305–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Chen MC, Lee N, Bourla N, Hamilton DR (2008) Corneal biomechanical measurements before and after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:1886–1891

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Luce D (2006) Methodology for corneal compensated IOP and corneal resistance factor for an ocular response analyzer. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47:2266

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kotecha A, Elsheikh A, Roberts CR, Zhu H, Garway-Heath DF (2006) Corneal thickness- and age-related biomechanical properties of the cornea measured with the ocular response analyzer. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47:5337–5347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Broman AT, Congdon NG, Bandeen-Roche K, Quigley HA (2007) Influence of corneal structure, corneal responsiveness, and other ocular parameters on tonometric measurement of intraocular pressure. J Glaucoma 16:581–588

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chang PY, Chang SW, Wang JY (2010) Assessment of corneal biomechanical properties and intraocular pressure with the Ocular Response Analyzer in childhoodmyopia. Br J Ophthalmol 94(7):877–881

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Jiang Z, Shen M, Mao G, Chen D, Wang J, Qu J, Lu F (2011) Association between corneal biomechanical properties and myopia in Chinese subjects. Eye (Lond) 25(8):1083–1089

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Qiu K, Lu X, Zhang R, Wang G, Zhang M (2016) Corneal Biomechanics Determination in Healthy Myopic Subjects. J Ophthalmol 2016:2793516

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Bueno-Gimeno I, España-Gregori E, Gene-Sampedro A, Lanzagorta-Aresti A, Piñero-Llorens DP (2014) Relationship among corneal biomechanics, refractive error, and axial length. Optom Vis Sci 91(5):507–513

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wong YZ, Lam AK (2015) The roles of cornea and axial length in corneal hysteresis among emmetropes and high myopes: a pilot study. Curr Eye Res 40(3):282–289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Öner V, Taş M, Özkaya E, Oruç Y (2015) Effect of pathological myopia on biomechanical properties: study by ocular response analyzer. Int J Ophthalmol 8(2):365–368

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Del Buey MA, Lavilla L, Ascaso FJ, Lanchares E, Huerva V, Cristóbal JA (2014) Assessment of corneal biomechanical properties and intraocular pressure in myopic spanish healthy population. J Ophthalmol 2014:905129

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Hurmeric V, Sahin A, Ozge G, Bayer A (2010) The relationship between corneal biomechanical properties and confocal microscopy findings in normal and keratoconic eyes. Cornea 29:641–649

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Xu S, Xu A, Tao A, Wang J, Fan F, Lu F (2010) Corneal biomechanical properties and intraocular pressure in high myopic anisometropia. Eye Contact Lens 36(4):204–209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lim L, Gazzard G, Chan YH, Fong A, Kotecha A, Sim EL et al (2008) Cornea biomechanical characteristics and their correlates with refractive error in Singaporean children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 49(9):3852–3857

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Song Y, Congdon N, Li L, Zhou Z, Choi K, Lam DS et al (2008) Corneal hysteresis and axial length among Chinese secondary school children: the Xichang Pediatric Refractive Error Study (X-PRES) report no. 4. Am J Ophthalmol 145(5):819–826

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Fontes BM, Ambrosio R Jr, Alonso RS, Jardim D, Velarde GC, Nose W (2008) Corneal biomechanical metrics in eyes with refraction of −19.00 to +9.00 D in healthy Brazilian patients. J Refract Surg 24(9):941–945

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hager A, Schroeder B, Sadeghi M, Grossherr M, Wiegand W (2007) The influence of corneal hysteresis and corneal resistance factor on the measurement of intraocular pressure. Ophthalmologe 104:484–489

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Lam A, Chen D, Chiu R, Chui WS (2007) Comparison of IOP measurements between ORA and GAT in normal Chinese. Optom Vis Sci 84:909–914

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Medeiros FA, Weinreb RN (2006) Evaluation of the influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurements using the ocular response analyzer. J Glaucoma 15:364–370

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Wong TY, Klein BE, Klein R, Knudtson M, Lee KE (2003) Refractive errors, intraocular pressure, and glaucoma in a white population. Ophthalmology 110(1):211–217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Xu L, Wang Y, Wang S, Wang Y, Jonas JB (2007) High myopia and glaucoma susceptibility the Beijing eye study. Ophthalmology 114(2):216–220

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Edwards MH, Brown B (1993) Intraocular pressure in a selected sample ofmyopic and nonmyopic Chinese children. Optom Vis SCİ 70(1):15–17

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Schmid KL, Li RW, Edwards MH, Lew JK (2003) The expandability of the eye in childhood myopia. Curr Eye Res 26(2):65–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study has been partially presented at 44. Turkish Ophthalmology Society meeting, 2010.

Funding

Authors have no financial or proprietary interest in any instruments or products used in this study. The study has been accepted by local institutional ethical committee and financially supported by Celal Bayar University, Scientific Research Supporting Fund. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology, Turgutlu State Hospital, Manisa, Turkey

    Nehir İnceoğlu

  2. Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Baskent University Zubeyde Hanim Hospital, Izmir, Turkey

    Sinan Emre

  3. Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Başkent University Konya Research Hospital, Goz Hastaliklari Anabilim Dali, 42000, Konya, Turkey

    Mahmut Oğuz Ulusoy

Authors
  1. Nehir İnceoğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sinan Emre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mahmut Oğuz Ulusoy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mahmut Oğuz Ulusoy.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

İnceoğlu, N., Emre, S. & Ulusoy, M.O. Investigation of corneal biomechanics at moderate to high refractive errors. Int Ophthalmol 38, 1061–1067 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-017-0560-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-017-0560-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation