Comparison of Corneal Astigmatism and Higher-order Aberrations between Color Light-emitting Diode Topographer and Scheimpflug Imager
10.3341/jkos.2019.60.10.922
- Author:
Da Yeong KIM
1
;
Minji HA
;
Rowoon YI
;
Hyo Won KIM
;
So Hyang CHUNG
Author Information
1. Department of Ophthalmology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, Seoul, Korea. chungsh@catholic.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Astigmatism;
Corneal topography;
Corneal wavefront aberration
- MeSH:
Astigmatism;
Cataract;
Coma;
Cornea;
Corneal Topography;
Corneal Wavefront Aberration;
Humans;
Lotus;
Prospective Studies;
Seoul
- From:Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society
2019;60(10):922-928
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To compare corneal astigmatism, keratometry and corneal higher order aberrations between the light emitting diode corneal topography analyzer and Scheimpflug Imager. METHODS: This prospective study involved 45 patients (45 eyes) who visited Seoul St. Mary's hospital before cataract surgery from June 7, 2017, to August 2, 2017. For each eye, keratometry, astigmatism and its axis of cornea, higher-order aberrations were evaluated with a Scheimpflug Imager (Pentacam HR®, Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) and a color-LED corneal topographer (Cassini®, i-Optics, Den Haag, The Netherlands). RESULTS: Astigmatism magnitude measured using Cassini® and Pentacam® showed no statistically differences but anterior and total astigmatic axes were significantly different, as measured by the two devices (p < 0.05). Anterior and total mean keratometry were statistically significantly different, as measured by the two devices (p < 0.05). J0 and J45 vectors of anterior and total cornea were statistically different (p < 0.05). In addition, Cassini® and Pentacam® showed discrepancies between total corneal astigmatism, total J0 and J45 vectors. Corneal anterior spherical aberration, vertical and horizontal coma, and oblique and horizontal trefoil aberrations were not statistically different between the two devices. CONCLUSIONS: Astigmatic axes obtained from the two devices based on different principles showed statistically significant differences. Astigmatism magnitude was not statistically different but showed a discrepancy between the two devices.
