agreement between corneal topography with the dual- scheimpflug placido corneal topographer,...
TRANSCRIPT
Agreement Between Corneal Topography with the Dual-Scheimpflug Placido Corneal Topographer, Scheimpflug Corneal Topographer, and Scanning-Slit Topography in
Keratoconus: Implications for Assessing Progression
Pravin K Vaddavalli MD, Shyamsunder T, Parthasarthy K, Preetam Kumar, Shrikant D, Preeji MS, Reekham S, Faiza S
Cornea Service, Contact lens service
LV Prasad Eye Institute
Hyderabad, India
None of the authors has any financial interests or conflict of interest to disclose
Purpose
• To assess the repeatability of the Orbscan, Pentacam and Galilei topography systems in normal and keratoconus eyes
• To assess the agreement between these three topography machines in assessing normal and keratoconus eyes
PENTACAM GALILEIORBSCAN
Methods• 96 right eyes on normal patients• 45 clinically diagnosed keratoconus• 2 scans each on Orbscan, Pentacam and Galilei• Intersession variability, instrument agreement
ORBSCAN PENTACAM GALILEI
NORMALS NORMALS NORMALS
KERATOCONUS KERATOCONUS KERATOCONUS
INTE
RSES
SIO
N R
EPEA
TABI
LITY
(M
AX/S
TEEP
KER
ATO
MET
RY)
NORMALS NORMALS NORMALS
KERATOCONUS
PENTACAM vs GALILEI
KERATOCONUS
ORBSCAN vs PENTACAM ORBSCAN vs GALILEI
KERATOCONUS
INTE
R IN
STRU
MEN
T RE
PEAT
ABIL
ITY
(MAX
/STE
EP K
ERAT
OM
ETRY
)
SUMMARY
• Normals – Pentacam had least intersession variability
• Keratoconus eyes – all topographers showed greater
intersession variation compared to normals, Galilei was best
• Between instruments, Pentacam and Galilei had the highest
agreement in both normals and keratoconus eyes