Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 22, 2026

Three Different Protocols of Corneal Collagen Crosslinking in Keratoconus: Conventional, Accelerated and Iontophoresis
Published on: November 12, 2015
Topographic Evaluation of Unilateral Keratoconus Patients
Cumali Değirmenci1, Melis Palamar1, Nergis İsmayilova2
1Ege University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Ophthalmology, İzmir, Turkey
Objectives:
To compare data obtained by Scheimpflug camera (Pentacam) from both eyes of unilateral keratoconus patients and normal controls.
Materials And Methods:
This study was performed by retrospective chart review of 919 keratoconus patients. From these patients, 31 keratoconus eyes of 31 patients with unilateral keratoconus (Group 1), 31 normal fellow eyes of these patients (Group 2), and 30 right eyes of 30 normal controls (Group 3) were included in the study. Detailed ophthalmologic examination and Pentacam parameters at initial examination were analyzed and relationships between Groups 1, 2, and 3 were statistically evaluated. ROC curve analysis was also performed to determine the sensitivity and specificity of parameters that could be used to differentiate Group 2 from Groups 1 and 3.
Results:
The mean age was 30.07±11.00 (15-60) in Group 1-2 patients and 32.33±9.30 (18-45) in Group 3 patients (p=0.392). In comparison of Pentacam data, there were statistically significant differences between Groups 1 and 2 in all parameters except corneal volume (p<0.05). Group 1 and Group 3 were significantly different in all evaluated parameters (p<0.05). Steep keratometry, flat keratometry, mean keratometry, and posterior elevation (PE) were statistically similar between Groups 2 and 3 (p>0.05), while the other evaluated parameters differed significantly (p<0.05). ROC curve analysis showed that the difference in corneal thickness between the apex and thinnest point, PI, index of surface variance, index of height asymmetry and inferior-superior had the highest sensitivity and specificity in differentiating Group 2 from Group 3, while CCTapex, CCTmin, PE, and Rmin had the highest sensitivity and specificity in differentiating Group 2 from Group 1.
Conclusion:
In patients with unilateral keratoconus, fellow eyes appear to not be completely normal. Thus, it is recommended that fellow eyes also be evaluated in every examination of unilateral keratoconus patients.
More Related Videos
05:34A Mouse Model to Evaluate the Long-Term Structural and Functional Outcomes after the Reversal of Prolonged Unilateral Ureteric Obstruction
Published on: July 18, 2025
08:23A Multimodal Imaging- and Stimulation-based Method of Evaluating Connectivity-related Brain Excitability in Patients with Epilepsy
Published on: November 13, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Topographic Surveying and Contours
Plotting of Topographic Maps
Nursing Process for Patient and Caregiver Teaching III: Evaluation and Documentation
Nurses can use several methods to evaluate patient outcomes. For example, oral questions can assess cognitive learning,...
Patient-centered Care
Self-Evaluation: Self-Enhancement and Self-Verification
Drug Dosing: Obese Patients