Display options
Cite
Long Q, Wang J, Yang X, et al. Assessment of Corneal Biomechanical Properties by CorVis ST in Patients with Dry Eye and in Healthy Subjects. J Ophthalmol. 2015;2015:380624doi: 10.1155/2015/380624.
Long, Q., Wang, J., Yang, X., Jin, Y., Ai, F., & Li, Y. (2015). Assessment of Corneal Biomechanical Properties by CorVis ST in Patients with Dry Eye and in Healthy Subjects. Journal of ophthalmology, 2015380624. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/380624
Long, Qin, et al. "Assessment of Corneal Biomechanical Properties by CorVis ST in Patients with Dry Eye and in Healthy Subjects." Journal of ophthalmology vol. 2015 (2015): 380624. doi: https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/380624
Long Q, Wang J, Yang X, Jin Y, Ai F, Li Y. Assessment of Corneal Biomechanical Properties by CorVis ST in Patients with Dry Eye and in Healthy Subjects. J Ophthalmol. 2015;2015:380624. doi: 10.1155/2015/380624. Epub 2015 Nov 08. PMID: 26634151; PMCID: PMC4655069.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

J Ophthalmol. 2015;2015:380624. doi: 10.1155/2015/380624. Epub 2015 Nov 08.

Assessment of Corneal Biomechanical Properties by CorVis ST in Patients with Dry Eye and in Healthy Subjects.

Journal of ophthalmology

Qin Long, Jingyi Wang, Xue Yang, Yumei Jin, Fengrong Ai, Ying Li

Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China.

PMID: 26634151 PMCID: PMC4655069 DOI: 10.1155/2015/380624

Abstract

Purpose. To investigate corneal biomechanical properties in patients with dry eye and in healthy subjects using Corneal Visualization Scheimpflug Technology (CorVis ST). Methods. Biomechanical parameters were measured using CorVis ST in 28 eyes of 28 patients with dry eye (dry eye group) and 26 normal subjects (control group). The Schirmer I test value, tear film break-up time (TBUT), and corneal staining score (CSS) were recorded for each eye. Biomechanical properties were compared between the two groups and bivariate correlation analysis was used to assess the relationship between biomechanical parameters and dry eye signs. Results. Only one of the ten biomechanical parameters was significantly different between the two groups. Patients in the dry eye group had significantly lower highest concavity time (HC-time) (P = 0.02) than the control group. Correlation analysis showed a significant negative correlation between HC-time and CSS with marginal P value (ρ = -0.39, P = 0.04) in the dry eye group. Conclusions. The corneal biomechanical parameter of HC-time is reduced in dry eyes compared to normal eyes. There was also a very weak but significant negative correlation between HC-time and CSS in the dry eye group, indicating that ocular surface damage can give rise to a more compliant cornea in dry eyes.

References

  1. J Ophthalmol. 2014;2014:905129 - PubMed
  2. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007 Aug;33(8):1371-5 - PubMed
  3. J Refract Surg. 2009 Oct;25(10):888-93 - PubMed
  4. Ophthalmic Res. 2008 Oct;40(6):315-21 - PubMed
  5. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2014 Aug;252(8):1329-35 - PubMed
  6. Matrix Biol. 2015 May-Jul;44-46:224-31 - PubMed
  7. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005 Jan;31(1):156-62 - PubMed
  8. ISRN Ophthalmol. 2014 Mar 04;2014:724546 - PubMed
  9. Eye Contact Lens. 2014 Jul;40(4):248-56 - PubMed
  10. J Ophthalmol. 2014;2014:147516 - PubMed
  11. Surv Ophthalmol. 2007 Nov;52 Suppl 2:S109-14 - PubMed
  12. Mol Vis. 2012;18:431-8 - PubMed
  13. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2013 Jul-Aug;76(4):229-32 - PubMed
  14. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1992 Mar 20;1138(3):222-8 - PubMed
  15. Eye (Lond). 2011 Dec;25(12):1570-4 - PubMed
  16. Cornea. 2009 Oct;28(9):1023-7 - PubMed
  17. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009 Sep;50(9):4229-36 - PubMed
  18. Cornea. 2012 Aug;31(8):849-54 - PubMed
  19. J Ophthalmol. 2014;2014:748654 - PubMed
  20. PLoS One. 2015 May 11;10 (5):e0126277 - PubMed
  21. Acta Ophthalmol. 2015 May;93(3):e193-8 - PubMed
  22. J Ophthalmic Vis Res. 2014 Apr;9(2):240-50 - PubMed
  23. Exp Eye Res. 2008 Feb;86(2):445-51 - PubMed
  24. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2014 Oct;37(5):337-41 - PubMed
  25. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015 Jan 30;112(5):71-81; quiz 82 - PubMed
  26. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014 Jan;157(1):63-68.e2 - PubMed
  27. J R Soc Interface. 2010 Oct 6;7(51):1475-85 - PubMed
  28. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014 Apr;157(4):885-93 - PubMed
  29. PLoS One. 2011 Jan 27;6(1):e16437 - PubMed
  30. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012 Mar 21;53(3):1512-8 - PubMed
  31. Acta Ophthalmol. 2016 Aug;94(5):e317-24 - PubMed
  32. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014 Jun;40(6):870-87 - PubMed
  33. Cornea. 2012 Nov;31 Suppl 1:S50-6 - PubMed
  34. Optom Vis Sci. 2014 Dec;91(12):1446-54 - PubMed
  35. Optom Vis Sci. 2013 Jan;90(1):e1-8 - PubMed
  36. Ophthalmologe. 2014 Oct;111(10):914-9 - PubMed
  37. Mol Vis. 2009;15:250-8 - PubMed
  38. Cornea. 2013 Jul;32(7):928-32 - PubMed
  39. Ocul Surf. 2007 Apr;5(2):75-92 - PubMed
  40. Curr Eye Res. 2012 Jul;37(7):553-62 - PubMed
  41. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012 Mar;153(3):419-427.e1 - PubMed

Publication Types