• Users Online: 229
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home Current issue Ahead of print Search About us Editorial board Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 107  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 153-159

Comparison between the Scheimpflug camera and the topographic modeling system in the corneal assessment before refractive surgery


Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Mohamed M. A. Lolah
el Eskandrany Street. Moharam Beck, Alexandria, 21515
Egypt
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2090-0686.148123

Rights and Permissions

Purpose To compare corneal measurements by a Scheimpflug camera and a topographic modeling system (TMS 5) in patients seeking refractive surgery. Design Prospective comparative study between two instruments. Setting RoayaLasik Center, Alexandria, Egypt. Patients and methods This study included 30 eyes of patients seeking refractive surgery, selected randomly, between 18 and 35 years old without any history of corneal surgery. An informed consent was obtained from all patients before participation in the study. All the eyes were assessed by the Scheimpflug camera (WaveLight ALLERGO Oculyzer) and the TMS 5. The corneal measurements of the two assessments were compared. Results The mean central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements by the Scheimpflug camera and the TMS 5 were 549.3 ± 28.8 and 537.3 ± 26.6 μm, respectively, with a statistically significant difference between the two devices (P < 0.001). There was a statistically significant difference between their mean keratometric readings (P < 0.001). Astigmatism and the anterior maximum elevation mean readings showed no statistically significant difference between the two devices, although the difference between posterior maximum elevation mean readings in the two devices was statistically significant (P < 0.001). Conclusion CCT readings of the TMS 5 were thinner than the CCT readings of the Scheimpflug system. The keratometric readings were higher in the TMS 5. No statistically significant differences were found in astigmatism or maximum anterior elevations readings between the two devices, whereas there was a statistically significant difference in the maximum posterior elevations readings between the two devices.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1363    
    Printed16    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded133    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal