Interpretation of keratoconus indices

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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Acta ophthalmologica (Oxford, England) England), 2016-10, Vol.94 (S256), p.n/a
Main Authors: Eppig, T., Spira‐Eppig, C., Szentmáry, N., Langenbucher, A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Keratoconus
Mechanical properties
Ophthalmology
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary: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.
ISSN:1755-375X
1755-3768
DOI:10.1111/j.1755-3768.2016.0197