You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 113 No. 7, July 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Clinical Sciences
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (70)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Comparison of Methods for Detecting Keratoconus Using Videokeratography

Naoyuki Maeda, MD; Stephen D. Klyce, PhD; Michael K. Smolek, PhD

Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113(7):870-874.


Abstract

Background
The detection of keratoconus patterns on videokeratography is important for screening candidates for refractive surgery and for studying the genetic basis of keratoconus.

Objective
We compared three quantitative approaches to identifying keratoconus from videokeratographic information to examine the limitations and capabilities of each test and to determine their suitability for use in the clinical setting.

Methods
Videokeratographs typical of clinically diagnosed keratoconus (n=44) and of various non-keratoconus conditions (n=132, including normal, with-the-rule astigmatism, contact lens-induced corneal warpage, photorefractive keratectomy, keratoplasty, and pellucid marginal degeneration) were selected. Three methods for detecting keratoconus were used: keratometry (average Simulated Keratometry [SimK] readings >45.7 diopters [D]); the modified Rabinowitz-McDonnell test (central corneal power >47.2 D and/or Inferosuperior Asymmetry [I-S] value >1.4 D); and an expert system classifier (classification based on discriminant analysis and classification tree with eight topographic indexes). Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each test.

Results
Sensitivities were 84% for keratometry, 96% for the modified Rabinowitz-McDonnell test, and 98% for the expert system classifier. Specificities for the three methods were 86%, 85%, and 99%, respectively. In terms of sensitivity, the expert system classifier was significantly better than keratometry (P=.04). In terms of specificity, the expert system classifier was significantly better than either of the other methods (P=.001).

Conclusions
For screening candidates for refractive surgery, where high sensitivity is needed, either the modified Rabinowitz-McDonnell test or the expert system classifier is suitable. For diagnosing keratoconus, where high specificity is more useful, the expert system classifier is more appropriate than the other two methods.



Author Affiliations

From the Lions Eye Research Laboratories, LSU Eye Center, Louisiana State University Medical Center School of Medicine, New Orleans. Dr Klyce is a paid consultant to Computed Anatomy Inc, New York, NY. None of the other authors or their family members has any proprietary or financial interest in the instruments used in this study.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Intraoperative and Postoperative Effects of Corneal Collagen Cross-linking on Progressive Keratoconus
Vinciguerra et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2009;127:1258-1265.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Longitudinal analysis of corneal topography in suspected keratoconus
Shirayama-Suzuki et al.
Br J Ophthalmol 2009;93:815-819.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Mapping the Corneal Sub-basal Nerve Plexus in Keratoconus by In Vivo Laser Scanning Confocal Microscopy.
Patel and McGhee
IOVS 2006;47:1348-1351.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Corneal topography by keratometry
Douthwaite and Evardson
Br J Ophthalmol 2000;84:842-847.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Comparison of Methods for Detecting Keratoconus Using Videokeratography
Goren
Arch Ophthalmol 1996;114:631-631.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1995 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.