scholarly journals ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL CORNEAL THICKNESS AND CENTRAL CORNEAL ENDOTHELIAL CELL COUNT WITH PROGRESSIVE STAGES OF DIABETIC RETINOPATHY

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (84) ◽  
pp. 4924-4928
Author(s):  
Nirmal Kumar Sasmal ◽  
Somnath Das ◽  
Sisir Singh
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (44) ◽  
pp. 3300-3304
Author(s):  
Vandana Panjwani ◽  
Sachin Daigavane

BACKGROUND The main attributes of cornea which makes it optically important is its ability to maintain its dehydrated state. This corneal dehydration can be achieved and maintained by various factors among which corneal endothelial cell count and morphology play a significant role. Corneal attributes considered in this study i.e. the corneal endothelial cell count and central corneal thickness are extremely variable, and changes are seen even with smaller changes in anterior segment or overall structural changes in eyes. We wanted to compare central corneal thickness in emmetropia and axial myopia and compare corneal endothelial cell count in emmetropia and axial myopia. METHODS The sample size was decided taking into consideration various prevalence studies. The patients were consecutively recruited for the study considering the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The subjects were divided into two groups emmetropia and axial myopia and were differentiated on the basis of the axial lengths. Specular microscopy was performed for the subjects and corneal endothelial cell count, morphology and central corneal thickness were measured, and comparative study was performed. RESULTS This study of 80 eyes shows us that the difference between mean the corneal endothelial cell count between emmetrope (2812.80 cells / mm2) and axial myopes (2653 cells / mm2) is statistically significant where p was < 0.05 while the mean central corneal thickness measurements didn’t show statistically significant change between emmetrope (490.05 microns) and axial myope. (489.37 microns). CONCLUSIONS Axial length has an indirect correlation with the corneal endothelial cell count which is statistically significant. While significant correlation between the central corneal thickness and axial length cannot be established in this study. KEY WORDS Emmetropia, Axial Myopia, Corneal Endothelial Cell Count, Central Corneal Thickness, Comparison


2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Syed Kubravi ◽  
Syed Qureshi ◽  
Shah Nawaz ◽  
Arshi Nazir ◽  
Khalid Kawoosa

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 1820-1823
Author(s):  
Farshad Ostadian ◽  
Fereydoun Farrahi ◽  
Bahman Cheraghian

Background: It was reported that corneal endothelial cell depletion is a complication of the retinal laser. In this study, the effect of panretinal laser on corneal endothelium was investigated. Method: A group consisting of 47 eyes of 47 Diabetic patients who need a panretinal photocoagulation laser was compared with another group of 47 diabetic patients who did not require a laser. The patient's age was chosen in the range of 50-70 and the tools included Ellex double frequency LASER, Specular microscopy, Pachymetry, and Condense Lens 90. Time course of coefficient of variation, endothelial cell density, hexagonal cells and central corneal thickness were evaluated. ANOVA, Dennett's, and Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the data. P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: We found no significant differences in age, gender between the two groups. There was no significant differences in hexagonal cells, coefficient of variation, endothelial cell density and central corneal thickness between the two groups at any time points. Conclusion: This study suggests that the "panretinal photocoagulation laser" conserves corneal endothelial cells of subsequent damage in diabetic retinopathy patients Keywords: photocoagulation laser, corneal, endothelial cell, argon laser, double frequency laser.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 529-535
Author(s):  
Woo Chan Park ◽  
◽  
Sang Wook Jin ◽  

AIM: To assess the clinical performance of a multifocal corneoscleral lens for the presbyopia correction. METHODS: A prospective clinical trial of the Onefit™ A multifocal corneoscleral lens was conducted with 40 participants with presbyopia. At 4wk of continuous wear of the corneoscleral lens, changes in the distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity (VA) were evaluated. The safety of the corneoscleral lens, central corneal thickness (CCT), corneal endothelial cell count, binocular stereopsis, tear film break-up time (BUT), corneal staining, corneal edema, corneal neovascularization (NV), and conjunctival hyperemia were examined. In addition, a subjective questionnaire addressing satisfaction (rated from 1 to 5 points) and discomfort (rated from 1 to 5 points) was administered. RESULTS: Forty participants were enrolled in this study. Six participants were excluded because of poor compliance with lens fitting (n=2) and loss to follow-up (n=4). The mean age of the participants was 53.0±4.9y. At 4wk of continuous wear of the corneoscleral lens, the best corrected far, intermediate, and near VA was 0.08±0.11, 0.10±0.12, and 0.10±0.12 logMAR, respectively. These results were significant improvements over the baseline uncorrected VA (far: P=0.004; intermediate: P=0.004; near: P=0.002). CCT, corneal endothelial cell count, binocular stereopsis, BUT, corneal staining, corneal edema, corneal NV, and conjunctival hyperemia were not significantly different between baseline and after corneoscleral lens use. The average satisfaction scores for fit sensation; corrected far, intermediate, and near VA; and ease of handling were 4.1, 3.4, 3.6, 3.5, and 3.4, respectively. The average discomfort scores for dryness, irritation, foreign body sensation, redness, fogging, and halo were 1.7, 1.8, 1.5, 1.7, 1.7, and 1.3, respectively. CONCLUSION: Far, intermediate, and near VA are improved in presbyopic patients with the multifocal corneoscleral lens compared to uncorrected baseline VA, without adverse ocular effects. This evidence supports the safety and effectiveness of presbyopia correction with multifocal corneoscleral lenses.


1998 ◽  
Vol 76 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephan Kaminski ◽  
Anton Hommer ◽  
Didem Koyuncu ◽  
Robert Biowski ◽  
Talin Barisani ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document