Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of corneal shape parameters on corneal deformation responses measured with a Scheimpflug camera

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

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the effect of corneal shape parameters on corneal deformation responses measured with a Scheimpflug camera.

Methods

A total of 241 eyes of 241 participants were enrolled in this study. The anterior and posterior corneal curvature radii (CCR), anterior and posterior corneal Q-values, and corneal diameters of the participants were measured using the Pentacam HR. A total of 17 corneal deformation parameters including time, velocity, deflection amplitude, length, and area during ingoing applanation, highest concavity, and outgoing applanation were recorded by corneal visualization using Scheimpflug technology (Corvis ST). The effect of corneal shape parameters on corneal deformation responses was evaluated using multivariate regression models.

Results

Multivariate regression analyses showed that six, five, four, and three corneal deformation parameters were significantly correlated with anterior CCR, posterior CCR, anterior Q-value, and posterior Q-value, respectively. Steeper anterior corneal curvature was associated with faster velocity during ingoing applanation and greater deformation during outgoing applanation. Steeper posterior corneal curvature was correlated with faster velocity during outgoing applanation and greater deformation during ingoing applanation. Eyes that had steeper corneal curvatures were associated with less stiff corneas. More negative anterior Q-value corresponded with faster velocity and greater deformation during ingoing applanation. Eyes that had more prolate posterior corneal surfaces showed more resistance to corneal deformation at the highest concavity. However, corneal diameter was not selected in any corneal deformation parameters models.

Conclusion

Corneal deformation response is significantly influenced by anterior and posterior corneal curvature and corneal asphericity, but not corneal diameter.

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. Khawaja AP, Rojas Lopez KE, Hardcastle AJ et al (2019) Genetic variants associated with corneal biomechanical properties and potentially conferring susceptibility to keratoconus in a genome-wide association study. JAMA Ophthalmol 137(9):1005–1012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kotecha A (2007) What biomechanical properties of the cornea are relevant for the clinician? Surv Ophthalmol 52(Suppl 2):S109–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Liu J, Roberts CJ (2005) Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurement: quantitative analysis. J Cataract Refract Surg 31(1):146–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Tian L, Wang D, Wu Y, Meng X, Chen B, Ge M, Huang Y (2016) Corneal biomechanical characteristics measured by the CorVis Scheimpflug technology in eyes with primary open-angle glaucoma and normal eyes. Acta Ophthalmol 94(5):e317–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Roberts CJ, Mahmoud AM, Bons JP et al (2017) Introduction of two novel stiffness parameters and interpretation of air puff-induced biomechanical deformation parameters with a dynamic scheimpflug analyzer. J Refract Surg 33(4):266–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Piñero DP, Alcón N (2014) In vivo characterization of corneal biomechanics. J Cataract Refract Surg 40(6):870–887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Vinciguerra R, Elsheikh A, Roberts CJ et al (2016) Influence of pachymetry and intraocular pressure on dynamic corneal response parameters in healthy patients. J Refract Surg 32(8):550–561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fernández J, Rodríguez-Vallejo M, Martínez J, Tauste A, Piñero DP (2016) Corneal thickness after SMILE affects Scheimpflug-based dynamic tonometry. J Refract Surg 32(12):821–828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Miki A, Maeda N, Ikuno Y, Asai T, Hara C, Nishida K (2017) Factors associated with corneal deformation responses measured with a dynamic scheimpflug analyzer. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 58(1):538–544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lim L, Wei RH, Chan WK, Tan DT (2007) Evaluation of keratoconus in Asians: role of Orbscan II and Tomey TMS-2 corneal topography. Am J Ophthalmol 143(3):390–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sedaghat MR, Daneshvar R, Kargozar A, Derakhshan A, Daraei M (2010) Comparison of central corneal thickness measurement using ultrasonic pachymetry, rotating Scheimpflug camera, and scanning-slit topography. Am J Ophthalmol 150(6):780–789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hon Y, Lam AK (2013) Corneal deformation measurement using Scheimpflug noncontact tonometry. Optom Vis Sci 90(1):e1–e8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ali NQ, Patel DV, McGhee CN (2014) Biomechanical responses of healthy and keratoconic corneas measured using a noncontact scheimpflug-based tonometer. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 55(6):3651–3659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Asaoka R, Nakakura S, Tabuchi H et al (2015) The relationship between Corvis ST tonometry measured corneal parameters and intraocular pressure, corneal thickness and corneal curvature. PLoS ONE 10(10):e0140385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Zhang Y, Wang Y, Li L, Dou R, Wu W, Wu D, Jhanji V (2018) Corneal stiffness and its relationship with other corneal biomechanical and nonbiomechanical parameters in myopic eyes of Chinese patients. Cornea 37(7):881–885

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Calossi A (2007) Corneal asphericity and spherical aberration. J Refract Surg 23(5):505–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Nieto-Bona A, Lorente-Velázquez A, Mòntes-Micó R (2009) Relationship between anterior corneal asphericity and refractive variables. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 247(6):815–820

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cui X, Yang Y, Li Y et al (2019) Correlation between anterior chamber volume and corneal biomechanical properties in human eyes. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 7(10):379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gharaee H, Abrishami M, Shafiee M, Ehsaei A (2014) White-to-white corneal diameter: normal values in healthy Iranian population obtained with the Orbscan II. Int J Ophthalmol 7(2):309–312

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Huseynova T, Waring GO, Roberts C, Krueger RR, Tomita M (2014) Corneal biomechanics as a function of intraocular pressure and pachymetry by dynamic infrared signal and Scheimpflug imaging analysis in normal eyes. Am J Ophthalmol 157(4):885–893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Leung CK, Ye C, Weinreb RN (2013) An ultra-high-speed Scheimpflug camera for evaluation of corneal deformation response and its impact on IOP measurement. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 54(4):2885–2892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Bueno-Gimeno I, Martínez-Albert N, Gené-Sampedro A, España-Gregori E (2019) Anterior segment biometry and their correlation with corneal biomechanics in caucasian children. Curr Eye Res 44(2):118–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81670884 and No. 81873684).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinical College of Ophthalmology, Tianjin Medical University, No 4. Gansu Road, He-ping District, Tianjin, 300020, China

    Jing Liu, Yan Wang, Haohan Zou & Mengdi Li

  2. Tianjin Eye Hospital, Tianjin Eye Institute, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Nankai University, Tianjin, China

    Yan Wang

Authors
  1. Jing Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yan Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Haohan Zou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mengdi Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yan Wang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All other authors certify that they have no affiliations with or no involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest, or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOC 75 KB)

Supplementary file2 (DOC 66 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, J., Wang, Y., Zou, H. et al. Influence of corneal shape parameters on corneal deformation responses measured with a Scheimpflug camera. Int Ophthalmol 41, 2853–2859 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-021-01844-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-021-01844-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation