Ординатура / Офтальмология / Английские материалы / Elevation Based Corneal Tomography 2nd_Belin, Khachikian, Ambrósio_2011
.pdf
50 |
ELEVATION BASED CORNEAL TOMOGRAPHY |
Figure 3A. In this clinical example (posterior elevation) the elevation map appears to show a prominent central island > 25 microns off the BFS. Closer inspection, however, reveals that the area (diameter) used to calculate the BFS was 9.00 mm.
Figure 3B. When displayed with a small diameter (in this example 8.5 mm) the island becomes less pronounced and the maximal elevation off the BFS is decreased to 8.5 microns.
CHAPTER 4. THE IMPORTANCE OF UNDERSTANDING THE REFERENCE SURFACE |
51 |
•The BFS is determined by an area of the cornea that is neither too flat nor too steep and allows easy visual inspection for screening purposes.
•It is usually easy to obtain maps with at least 8.0 mm of valid data (nonextrapolated). This inures no incorporation of invalid data points.
•Published normal values and screening programs (Belin / Ambrosio Enhanced Ectasia Display) have all been developed with a fixed BFS set to 8.0 mm.
•Recent changes in the Pentacam will alert the user when there is excessive
extrapolated data within the 8.0 mm zone.
For routine use (e.g. refractive surgery screening) it is recommended to use the MAN setting with the BFS set to SPHERE, FLOAT, and the DIAMETER set to 8.0 mm. We also suggest that for routine screening the overall area of the map displayed on the screen be limited to the central 9.0 mm zone (this is available in the drop down menu). This does not eliminate the peripheral coverage; it just masks it from the screening view and makes the inspection of the maps easier. When viewing the maps limited to the central 9.0 mm area a valid map would have no or very minimal extrapolated data. Extrapolated data is marked by either black dots or white areas (this is user selectable and the authors prefer white areas as it is easier for the technicians to see when to repeat the exam due to insufficient coverage). Technicians should be instructed (when the map is limited in coverage to the 9.0 mm) that the presence of extrapolated/missing data usually indicates a poor image capture and warrants a repeated exam. In the authors’ experience, in all but markedly abnormal corneas, it is possible to obtain maps free of extrapolated data. For refractive screening we are dealing with presumed normal corneas and quality images should almost always be obtained.
As opposed to a Best-Fit-Sphere, it has been proposed by some to use either shapes that more closely mimic the corneal shape (e.g. toric ellipsoid) or represent the average corneal shape or average BFS.5,6 While average shapes may have some utility in population studies they are effectively useless for screening individual patients. For example, the average weight of an adult male may be 85 kg (187 lbs), but an individual 5’2” tall at that weight would be obese, while someone 6’4” would be very thin. Normal corneal shapes vary widely making average shapes as useful as the average weight in the above example.
Others have proposed using a toric-ellipsoid as the base reference surface for screening patients under the premise that a toric-ellipsoid more closely follows the normal prolate shape of the cornea. While this is true (i.e. toric-ellipsoid more closely mimics the shape of the cornea), this is exactly opposite of what a functional reference surface should do when screening normal patients. The purpose of the reference surface is to highlight or magnify surface features to allow the clinician to identify things such as astigmatism or conical protrusion (ectasia or keratoconus). A reference surface, such as an ellipse or toric-ellipsoid, will more closely fit the astigmatic or conical cornea and effectively mask the pathology. The following are 4 clinical samples of known keratoconus corneas comparing their appearance with a BFS (upper left), ellipsoid (upper right), fixed toric-ellipsoid (lower left), and an adjustable toric-ellipsoid (lower right). These examples clearly demonstrate that for qualitative screening a BFS is superior (FIGURES 4 – 7).
52 |
ELEVATION BASED CORNEAL TOMOGRAPHY |
FIGURES 4 - 7. Clinical examples comparing the appearance of known keratoconic corneas using a spherical reference surface (UPPER LEFT), a best fit ellipsoid (UPPER RIGHT), a fixed toric-ellipsoid (LOWER LEFT) and a best fit toric-ellipsoid (LOWER RIGHT). A toric-ellipse will better fit a conical cornea and actually mask the pathology. In all cases shown the “island” using a spherical reference surface is more pronounced and significantly easier to detect.
Figure 4
CHAPTER 4. THE IMPORTANCE OF UNDERSTANDING THE REFERENCE SURFACE |
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 5
Figure 6
54 |
ELEVATION BASED CORNEAL TOMOGRAPHY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 7
In this final example we show a case of markedly advanced keratoconus with the cornea thinned to 244 microns. By all screening parameters (e.g. curvature indices, pachymetric distribution (FIGURE 8A)) this is an advanced case of keratoconus that is effectively masked by the toric-ellipsoid reference surface because the reference surface approximates the conical but abnormal shape of the keratoconic cornea (FIGURE 8B).
SUMMARY
Elevation maps have many inherent advantages when compared to curvature displays. To properly understand the elevation maps requires a thorough appreciation of the reference surface. A proper reference surface should allow for rapid and safe screening, comparisons of a patients’ change over time, and comparisons of different patients.
CHAPTER 4. THE IMPORTANCE OF UNDERSTANDING THE REFERENCE SURFACE |
55 |
|
|
|
|
Figure 8A
Figure 8B
Figure 8A-B. The top map (8A) shows a markedly advanced case of keratoconus with a cornea thinned to 244 microns, pachymetric distribution graphs far outside the normal range, K values > 60 D, and significantly abnormal indices. The standard anterior elevation map using a spherical reference surface clearly reveals the ectatic cornea with a maximal elevation off the BFS of > 80 microns. In spite of the advanced nature of the ectasia, an elevation map using a toric-ellipsoid significantly masks the conical protrusion (8B).
56 |
ELEVATION BASED CORNEAL TOMOGRAPHY |
REFERENCES
1.Rand R, Applegate R, Howland HC. A Mathematical Model of a Placido Disk Keratometer and its Implications for Recovery of Corneal Topography. Optom Vis Sci 74:926-930, 1997.
2.Roberts C. Characterization of the inherent error in a spherically-biased corneal topography system in mapping a radially aspheric surface. J Refract Corneal Surg 1994;10:103-11.
3.Belin MW, Litoff D, Strods SJ, et al: The PAR Technology Corneal Topography System. Refrac Corneal Surg 8:88-96, 1992
4.Cairns G, McGhee CN. Orbscan computerized topography: attributes, applications, and limitations. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005;31:205-20.
5.Holladay JT. Corneal topography using the Holladay Diagnostic Summary. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1997 Mar;23(2):209-21
6.Hersh PS, Shah SI, Holladay JT. Corneal asphericity following excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy. Summit PRK Topography Study Group. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers. 1996 May;27(5 Suppl):S421-8.
Chapter
5
Suggested Set-up and
Screening Guidelines
Michael W. Belin, MD, FACS
Stephen S. Khachikian, MD
Renato Ambrósio Jr., MD, PhD
One of the most important rules in establishing a systematic approach to screening patients is to have a consistent method. This includes not only the scales, colors, and maps but should also include using an experienced technician, assuring that contact lenses have been discontinued an adequate length of time, and when to perform the exam during your evaluation. We recommend acquiring the images before any other contact testing and before drops are instilled. It is advisable that maps be obtained prior to dilation of the patient (for more accurate center of pupil measurements) and prior to surface applanation.
The goal is to have a standardized method (scales, settings, colors) to allow for quick pattern recognition. Pattern recognition (qualitative) is much easier and quicker than quantitative evaluation. The only way to safely use pattern recognition is to insure that the scales and color bars remain consistent. The scales and color bars should be chosen to make the differentiation between “normal” and “abnormal” as easy as possible. With regular use, the screening of refractive patients should be both rapid and accurate. This is different than trying to further analyze a pathologic cornea where specific scales and/or colors may help further elucidate the pathologic process. Refractive screening is the equivalent of the cornea “home pregnancy test”, where a simple color change is used to separate “pregnant” or not (for us normal cornea or abnormal). If you are not pregnant (normal cornea) you are done. If you are pregnant (abnormal cornea), then further testing is warranted to determine the health, gestational period, etc. of the fetus. We are performing a screening exam. The recommendations below are designed to make screening easy, quick but also reliable. The scales chosen are designed to maximize the sensitivity of differentiating “normal” from “abnormal.” As mentioned earlier the suggested set-up below is not optimal for detailed evaluation of a pathologic cornea. Just as the “pregnancy” example above, once the screening exam determines you are “not normal,” further testing (different scales or maps) will likely be warranted.
It would be nice if there were international consensus on color scales, but what is typical in the US (ROYGBIV rainbow derived scale) is, at times, different than what is more commonly used in Europe, South America or Asia. The MOST important point is consistency in a practice. The choice of color and scale will affect the appearance of the maps only and not the “numbers” (as opposed to the reference surface will affect the elevation number.
58 |
ELEVATION BASED CORNEAL TOMOGRAPHY |
Since screening is done initially by pattern and color recognition, appropriate and consistent choices are important.
The following are some samples of the color bars and scales available just to show how appearances can vary based on scale and color. There are too many permutations to show all the possible combinations. The following is a sample keratoconus suspect in the 4 map refractive composite display:
The first display (FIGURE 1) shows our recommended scales and color selection. This uses the “Belin Intuitive Color Bar” for curvature and elevation maps and sets the elevation scale to +/- 75 microns. The Curvature and Pachymetry is set to ABS Normal and the Pachymetry color bar is set to Ambrosio 2. The display is limited to showing the central 9.0 mm. There is a suspicious island on the posterior elevation which is just at the upper limits of normal. The +/- 75 micron scale appears the most suitable elevation scale for refractive screening and dates back to our initial work with the PAR CTS in the late 1980’s.
Figure 1
CHAPTER 5. SUGGESTED SET-UP AND SCREENING GUIDELINES |
59 |
This is the same map except the elevation scale is increased to +/- 150 microns (FIGURE 2). For screening normal refractive patients the wider scale results in a decreased ability to easily identify borderline normal values (e.g. masks posterior island).
Figure 2