Search

Purpose. To compare corneal deformation characteristics using ultra-high-speed Scheimpflug camera (Corvis ST) in patients with nonmyopic (NM), mild-to-moderate nonaxial myopic (MM), and high axial myopic (HM) eyes. Methods. In this cross-sectional study, normal subjects aged >40 years with no history of ocular laser/surgery were classified according to axial length (AL) and spherical equivalence (SE) into three groups: (1) NM (SE > −0.50 D and AL Results. A total of 180 eyes were recruited. 98 eyes were NM, 30 eyes were MM, and 52 eyes were HM. There were significant correlations of OCV to the degree of refractive error (r = 0.203, p<0.001) and AL (r = −0.242, p<0.001). After adjusting for age, sex, intraocular pressure, and corneal thickness, there was significantly higher CDA (β = 0.07, p<0.001), faster OCV (β = −0.08, p<0.001), and smaller radius (β = −0.39, p=0.01) in the HM group compared to the NM group. Conclusion. The higher CDA, faster OCV, and smaller radius found in the HM may suggest that these eyes have reduced ocular stiffness and may be less stable and more prone to stress.

Background. Assessment of color disc photograph (C-DP) is affected by image quality, which decreases the ability to detect glaucoma. High-dynamic-range (HDR) imaging provides a greater range of luminosity. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the capability of ophthalmology residents to detect glaucoma using HDR-concept disc photography (HDR-DP) compared to C-DP. Design. Cross-sectional study. Methods. Twenty subjects were classified by 3 glaucoma specialists as either glaucoma, glaucoma suspect, or control. All C-DPs were converted to HDR-DPs and randomly presented and assessed by 10 first-year ophthalmology residents. Sensitivity and specificity of glaucoma detection were compared. Results. The mean ± SD of averaged retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness was 74.0 ± 6.1 μm, 100.2 ± 9.6 μm, and 105.8 ± 17.2 μm for glaucoma, glaucoma suspect, and controls, respectively. The diagnostic sensitivity of HDR-DP was higher than that of C-DP (87% versus 68%, mean difference: 19.0, 95% CI: 4.91 to 33.1; p=0.014). Regarding diagnostic specificity, HDR-DP and C-DP yielded 46% and 75% (mean difference: 29.0, 95% CI: 13.4 to 44.6; p=0.002). Conclusions. HDR-DP statistically increased diagnostic sensitivity but not specificity. HDR-DP may be a screening tool for nonexpert ophthalmologists.