SavedAdd your journal

Journals / BEYOGLU EYE JOURNAL / 2018 / Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 3

To Evaluate Corneal Biomechanical Changes after Strabismus Surgery with Ocular Response Analyzer

Ebru Demet AYGIT
Ali DEMİRCAN
Zeynep ALKIN
Alper AĞCA
Birsen GÖKYİĞİT
Pages
138–141
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: This is the first study aimed to evaluate the corneal biomechanical changes after strabismus surgery. and CRF were found to statistically significance at 6 month after strabismus surgery.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: Corneal biomechanical changes were also suspected and investigated after some scleral procedures but not after strabismus surgery.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Corneal biomechanical properties were assessed using the ocular response analyzer (ORA) (ORA, Reichert Inc., Depew, New York, USA) before and 6 months after the surgery in 67 eyes of 67 patients performing strabismus surgery.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: This is the first study aimed to evaluate the corneal biomechanical changes after strabismus surgery. and CRF were found to statistically significance at 6 month after strabismus surgery.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objectives: Corneal biomechanical changes were also suspected and investigated after some scleral procedures but not after strabismus surgery. In this study, we aimed to evaluate corneal biomechanical changes following strabismus proce-dures with ocular response analyzer. Methods: This study was a retrospective case series. Corneal biomechanical properties were assessed using the ocular response analyzer (ORA) (ORA, Reichert Inc., Depew, New York, USA) before and 6 months after the surgery in 67 eyes of 67 patients performing strabismus surgery. Pre- and post-operative changes in corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) outcomes were examined. Results: The study group were divided into Groups 1 and 2 for the performed surgery. Pre- and post-operative CRFs were showed statistically significant differences in Groups 1 and 2. In Group 1, the mean CH was 11.7±2.4 mmHg at pre-operative and 12.3±2.5 mmHg at postoperative. The differences were not statistically significant in Group 1. Conclusion: This is the first study aimed to evaluate the corneal biomechanical changes after strabismus surgery. and CRF were found to statistically significance at 6 month after strabismus surgery.

🔖

Cite This Article

AYGIT, E. D., DEMİRCAN, A., ALKIN, Z., AĞCA, A., GÖKYİĞİT, B. (2018). To Evaluate Corneal Biomechanical Changes after Strabismus Surgery with Ocular Response Analyzer. BEYOGLU EYE JOURNAL, Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 3, 138–141. https://ajindex.com/articles/146243

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Martinez-Thompson JM, Diehl NN, Holmes JM, Mohney BG. Incidence, types, and lifetime risk of adult-onset strabismus. Ophthalmology 2014;121:877–82. Graham PA. Epidemiology of strabismus. Br J Ophthamol 1974:58;224–31.
  2. Preslan MW, Novak A. Baltimore Vision Screening Project. Ophthalmology 1996;103:105–9.
  3. Abrahamsson M, Magnusson G, Sjöstrand J. Inheritance of strabismus and the gain of using heredity to determine popula-tions at risk of developing strabismus. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1999;77:653–7.
  4. Chen X, Fu Z, Yu J, Ding H, Bai J, Chen J, et al. Prevalence of amblyopia and strabismus in Eastern China: results from screening of preschool children aged 36-72 months. Br J Oph-thalmol 2016;100:515–9.
  5. Wan MJ, Hunter DG. Complications of strabismus surgery: in-cidence and risk factors. Semin Ophthalmol 2014;29:421–8. Luce DA. Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005;31:156–62.
  6. Beyazyıldız E, Beyazyıldız O, Arifoğlu HB, Altıntaş AK, Köklü SG. Comparison of ocular response analyzer parameters in pri-mary open angle glaucoma and exfoliative glaucoma patients. Indian J Ophthalmol 2014;62:782–7.
  7. Terai N, Raiskup F, Haustein M, Pillunat LE, Spoerl E. Identifi-cation of biomechanical properties of the cornea: the ocular response analyzer. Curr Eye Res 2012;37:553–62.
  8. Pepose JS, Feigenbaum SK, Qazi MA, Sanderson JP, Roberts CJ. Changes in corneal biomechanics and intraocular pressure fol-lowing LASIK using static, dynamic, and noncontact tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol 2007;143:39–47.
  9. Chen MC, Lee N, Bourla N, Hamilton DR. Corneal biomechan-ical measurements before and after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 2008;34:1886–91.
  10. Shah S, Laiquzzaman M, Yeung I, Pan X, Roberts C. The use of the ocular response analyser to determine corneal hysteresis in eyes before and after excimer laser refractive surgery. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2009;32:123–8.
  11. Emara B, Probst LE, Tingey DP, Kennedy DW, Willms LJ, Machat J. Correlation of intraocular pressure and central corneal thick-ness in normal myopic eyes and after laser in situ keratomileu-sis. J Cataract Refract Surg 1998;24:1320–5.
  12. Levy Y, Zadok D, Glovinsky Y, Krakowski D, Nemet P. Tono-Pen versus Goldmann tonometry after excimer laser photorefrac-tive keratectomy. J Cataract Refract Surg 1999;25:486–91.
  13. Zadok D, Tran DB, Twa M, Carpenter M, Schanzlin DJ. Pneumotonometry versus Goldmann tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis for myop