SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Glokom Katarakt / 2006 / Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 1

Relation ship between central corneal thickness and refraction

Merkezi kornea kalınlığı ile refraksiyon ilişkisi

EBRU ESEN
Gül ÖZDEMİR
Nusret ÖZDEMİR
Pages
53–55
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: Central corneal thickness is not releated with type and degree of refractive error.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: To compare the central corneal thicknesses (CCT) of patients having different refractive errors, and to determine the correlation between the CCT and the type and degree of refractive error.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: The mean CCT of 64 myopic and 64 hyperopic patients, having astigmatism <1.0 Diopter (D), was calculated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Central corneal thickness is not releated with type and degree of refractive error.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kornea · Kırma · oküler

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the central corneal thicknesses (CCT) of patients having different refractive errors, and to determine the correlation between the CCT and the type and degree of refractive error. Materials and Methods: The mean CCT of 64 myopic and 64 hyperopic patients, having astigmatism <1.0 Diopter (D), was calculated. In the half of the myopic group (32 eyes), the spherical equivalant was >-3.0 D, while in the other half (32 eyes) it was <-3.0 D. Similarly, hyperopic eyes were grouped in two halves as one (32 eyes) having spherical equivalant >+3.0 D, and the other half (32 eyes) <+3.0 D. The CCT of 32 emmetropic eyes were evaluated as the control group. The CCT were compared between myopia, hyperopia and emmetropia groups. And also the correlation between CCT and spherical equivalant diopter, and the relationship between CCT and age are investigated. Results: The mean CCT of myopia and hyperopia group were found 544±36 &#956;m and 548±46 &#956;m respectively. The difference between the CCT of myopic and hyperopic eyes was not significant. The mean CCT of emmetropic eyes in control group was found 551±28 &#956;m. The difference between the CCT of control group and the eyes with refractive error was not significant. The mean CCT of myopia and hyperopia groups having spherical equivalant upper and lower than 3.0 D showed no significant difference. Conclusion: Central corneal thickness is not releated with type and degree of refractive error.

Özet

Amaç: Farklı refraksiyon kusuruna sahip hastaların merkezi kornea kalınlıklarını (MKK) karşılaştırmak, kırma kusurunun tipi ve derecesi ile kornea kalınlığı arasında ilişki olup olmadığını saptamak. Gereç ve Yöntem: Astigmatizması 1,0 Dioptrinin(D) altında olan 64 miyop ve 64 hipermetrop gözün ortalama MKK ölçüldü. Çalışmaya alınan miyop gözlerin yarısında (32 göz) sferik ekivalan değeri, -3,0 D’nin üstünde ve diğer yarısında (32 göz) -3.0 D’nin altında idi. Hipermetrop gözler de sferik ekivalan değerlerine göre +3,0 D’nin üstünde 32 göz ve +3,0 D’nin altında 32 göz olmak üzere iki alt gruba ayrıldı. Kontrol grubu olarak 32 emetrop gözün MKK kaydedildi. Miyop, hipermetrop ve emetrop gözler arasındaki kornea kalınlıkları karşılaştırıldı. Aynı zamanda MKK’nın refraksiyon derecesi ve yaşla olan ilişkisi de irdelendi. Bulgular: Merkezi kornea kalınlığı tüm miyop gözlerde ortalama 544±36 μm, hipermetrop gözlerde ise ortalama 548±46 μm olarak bulundu. İstatiksel olarak miyop ve hipermetrop gözlerin kornea kalınlıkları arasında anlamlı bir fark olmadığı görüldü. Kontrol grubundaki emetrop gözlerin ortalama MKK 551±28 μm olarak tespit edildi. Emetrop gözlerin ortalama MKK ile refraksiyon kusuru olan gözlerdeki ortalama kornea kalınlığı arasında anlamlı bir fark bulunamadı. 3.0 D’ nin altında ve üstündeki miyop ve hipermetrop gözlerde MKK karşılaştırıldığında da anlamlı bir fark bulunamadı. Sonuç: Merkezi kornea kalınlığı, kırma kusurunun tipi ve derecesi ile ilişkili değildir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ESEN, E., ÖZDEMİR, G., ÖZDEMİR, N. (2006). Relation ship between central corneal thickness and refraction. Glokom Katarakt, Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 1, 53–55. https://ajindex.com/articles/226695

References (11)

  1. Martola E, Baum JL: Central and peripheral corneal thickness. A clinical study. Arch Ophthalmol 1968,79:28-30
  2. Cho P, Lam C: Factors affecting the central corneal thickness of Hong Kong-Chinese. Curr Eye Res 1999,18:368-374
  3. Tong L, Saw SM, Siak JK, Gazzard G, Tan D: Corneal thickness determination and correlates in Singaporean schoolchildren. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004;45:4004-4009
  4. Alsbirk PH: Corneal thickness. II. Age variation, sex, difference and oculometric correlations. Acta Ophthalmol 1978;56:95-103
  5. Tanaka HM, Mori ES, Maia N, et al.: Corneal thickness in high myopes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1996;37:560
  6. Nomura H, Ando F, Niino N, et al.: The relationship between intraocular pressure and refractive error adjusting for age and central corneal thickness. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2004;24:41-45
  7. Olsen T, Ehlers N: The thickness of human cornea as determined by a specular method. Acta Ophthalmol 1984;62:859-871
  8. Foster PJ, Baasanhu J, Alsbirk PH, et al.: Central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure in a mongolian population. Ophthalmology 1998;105:969-973
  9. Shimmiyo M, Ross AJ, Moy A, et al.: Intraocular pressure, Goldmann applanation tension, corneal thickness and corneal curvature in Caucasians, Asians, Hispanics and African Americans. Am J Ophthalmol 2003;136:603-613
  10. Lowe RF: Central corneal thickness. Ocular correlations in normal eyes and those with primary angle-closure glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 1969;53:824-826
  11. Kiely PM, Carney LG, Smith G: Diurnal variations of corneal topography and thickness. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1982;59:95-103.