Table of Contents
ISRN Ophthalmology
Volume 2014, Article ID 724546, 19 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/724546
Review Article

Corneal Biomechanical Properties in Different Ocular Conditions and New Measurement Techniques

1Clinical & Experimental Optometry Research Lab, Center of Physics (Optometry), School of Sciences, University of Minho, Gualtar, 4710-057 Braga, Portugal
2Grupo de Investigación en Superficie Ocular y Lentes de Contacto, Departamento de Cirugía (Oftalmología), Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, 15782 A Coruña, Spain
3Department of Ophthalmology, Centro Hospital de Entre Douro e Vouga, Santa Maria da Feira, Portugal
4Department of Ophthalmology, Hospital Escola, Universidade Fernando Pessoa, Gondomar, Portugal

Received 26 October 2013; Accepted 26 November 2013; Published 4 March 2014

Academic Editors: M. Baskaran and A. Daxer

Copyright © 2014 Nery Garcia-Porta et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. J. G. Hay, The Biomechanics of Sports Techniques, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 4th edition, 1993.
  2. L. Ambrosio, P. A. Netti, and L. Nicolais, Soft Tissue, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 2002.
  3. D. A. Luce, “Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an Ocular Response Analyzer,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 156–162, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. D. Ortiz, D. Piñero, M. H. Shabayek, F. Arnalich-Montiel, and J. L. Alió, “Corneal biomechanical properties in normal, post-laser in situ keratomileusis, and keratoconic eyes,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 33, no. 8, pp. 1371–1375, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. J. M. González-Méijome, C. Villa-Collar, A. Queirós, J. Jorge, and M. A. Parafita, “Pilot study on the influence of corneal biomechanical properties over the short term in response to corneal refractive therapy for myopia,” Cornea, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 421–426, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. C. Kirwan and M. O'Keefe, “Corneal hysteresis using the Reichert ocular response analyser: findings pre- and post-LASIK and LASEK,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 86, no. 2, pp. 215–218, 2008. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. A. Grise-Dulac, A. Saad, O. Abitbol et al., “Assessment of corneal biomechanical properties in normal tension glaucoma and comparison with open-angle glaucoma, ocular hypertension, and normal eyes,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 486–489, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. D. A. Hoeltzel, P. Altman, K. Buzard, and K.-I. Choe, “Strip extensiometry for comparison of the mechanical response of bovine, rabbit, and human corneas,” Journal of Biomechanical Engineering, vol. 114, no. 2, pp. 202–215, 1992. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. N. E. Dowling, Mechanical Behavior of Materials, Engineering Methods for Deformation Fracture and Fatigue, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 3rd edition, 2007.
  10. J. Liu and C. J. Roberts, “Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurement: quantitative analysis,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 146–155, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. N. J. Schwartz, R. S. Mackay, and J. L. Sackman, “A theoretical and experimental study of the mechanical behavior of the cornea with application to the measurement of intraocular pressure,” The Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 585–643, 1966. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. B. Jue and D. M. Maurice, “The mechanical properties of the rabbit and human cornea,” Journal of Biomechanics, vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 847–853, 1986. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. J. O. Hjortdal, “On the biomechanical properties of the cornea with particular reference to refractive surgery,” Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica, vol. 76, no. 225, pp. 1–23, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. S. L.-Y. Woo, A. S. Kobayashi, W. A. Schlegel, and C. Lawrence, “Nonlinear material properties of intact cornea and sclera,” Experimental Eye Research, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 29–39, 1972. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. T. T. Andreassen, A. H. Simonsen, and H. Oxlund, “Biomechanical properties of keratoconus and normal corneas,” Experimental Eye Research, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 435–441, 1980. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. I. S. Nash, P. R. Greene, and C. S. Foster, “Comparison of mechanical properties of keratoconus and normal corneas,” Experimental Eye Research, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 413–424, 1982. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. J. O. Hjortdal, “Extensibility of the normo-hydrated human cornea,” Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 12–17, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. H. Wang, P. L. Prendiville, P. J. McDonnell, and W. V. Chang, “An ultrasonic technique for the measurement of the elastic moduli of human cornea,” Journal of Biomechanics, vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 1633–1636, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. M. R. Bryant and P. J. McDonnell, “Constitutive laws for biomechanical modeling of refractive surgery,” Journal of Biomechanical Engineering, vol. 118, no. 4, pp. 473–481, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. A. Elsheikh, D. Wang, M. Brown, P. Rama, M. Campanelli, and D. Pye, “Assessment of corneal biomechanical properties and their variation with age,” Current Eye Research, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 11–19, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. K. E. Hamilton and D. C. Pye, “Young's modulus in normal corneas and the effect on applanation tonometry,” Optometry and Vision Science, vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 445–450, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. J. Liu and H. Qi, “Dissipated energy function, hysteresis and precondition of a viscoelastic solid model,” Nonlinear Analysis: Real World Applications, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 907–912, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. S. Feizi, K. Jadidi, and M. Soheilian, “Possible protection of the posterior segment by a phakic intraocular lens,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 33, no. 12, pp. 2144–2146, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. A. Lam, D. Chen, R. Chiu, and W. S. Chui, “Comparison of IOP measurements between ORA and GAT in normal Chinese,” Optometry and Vision Science, vol. 84, no. 9, pp. 909–914, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. J. S. Pepose, S. K. Feigenbaum, M. A. Qazi, J. P. Sanderson, and C. J. Roberts, “Changes in corneal biomechanics and intraocular pressure following LASIK using static, dynamic, and noncontact tonometry,” The American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 143, no. 1, pp. 39–47, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. A. Kotecha, A. Elsheikh, C. R. Roberts, H. Zhu, and D. F. Garway-Heath, “Corneal thickness- and age-related biomechanical properties of the cornea measured with the Ocular Response Analyzer,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 47, no. 12, pp. 5337–5347, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. W. Lau and D. Pye, “A clinical description of Ocular Response Analyzer measurements,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 2911–2916, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. D. Touboul, A. Bénard, A. M. Mahmoud, A. Gallois, J. Colin, and C. J. Roberts, “Early biomechanical keratoconus pattern measured with an Ocular Response Analyzer: curve analysis,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 2144–2150, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. J. Y. Shin, J. S. Choi, J. Y. Oh, M. K. Kim, J. H. Lee, and W. R. Wee, “Evaluation of corneal biomechanical properties following penetrating keratoplasty using the Ocular Response Analyzer,” Korean Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 139–142, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. S. Franco and M. Lira, “Biomechanical properties of the cornea measured by the Ocular Response Analyzer and their association with intraocular pressure and the central corneal curvature,” Clinical and Experimental Optometry, vol. 92, no. 6, pp. 469–475, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. F. A. Medeiros and R. N. Weinreb, “Evaluation of the influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurements using the Ocular Response Analyzer,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 364–370, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. A. K. C. Lam, D. Chen, and J. Tse, “The usefulness of waveform score from the Ocular Response Analyzer,” Optometry and Vision Science, vol. 87, no. 3, pp. 195–199, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. J. Kerautret, J. Colin, D. Touboul, and C. Roberts, “Biomechanical characteristics of the ectatic cornea,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 510–513, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. E. Spoerl, N. Terai, F. Scholz, F. Raiskup, and L. E. Pillunat, “Detection of biomechanical changes after corneal cross-linking using Ocular Response Analyzer software,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 452–457, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. S. Zarei-Ghanavati, A. Ramirez-Miranda, F. Yu, and D. R. Hamilton, “Corneal deformation signal waveform analysis in keratoconic versus post-femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis eyes after statistical correction for potentially confounding factors,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 607–614, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. M. Sedaghat, M. Naderi, and M. Zarei-Ghanavati, “Biomechanical parameters of the cornea after collagen crosslinking measured by waveform analysis,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 36, no. 10, pp. 1728–1731, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. C. Edmund, “Corneal elasticity and ocular rigidity in normal and keratoconic eyes,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 134–140, 1988. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. C. Kirwan, M. O'keefe, and B. Lanigan, “Corneal hysteresis and intraocular pressure measurement in children using the reichert Ocular Response Analyzer,” The American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 142, no. 6, pp. 990–992, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. S. Shah, M. Laiquzzaman, R. Bhojwani, S. Mantry, and I. Cunliffe, “Assessment of the biomechanical properties of the cornea with the Ocular Response Analyzer in normal and keratoconic eyes,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 48, no. 7, pp. 3026–3031, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. L. Lim, G. Gazzard, Y. H. Chan et al., “Cornea biomechanical characteristics and their correlates with refractive error in Singaporean children,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 3852–3857, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. M. Shen, F. Fan, A. Xue, J. Wang, X. Zhou, and F. Lu, “Biomechanical properties of the cornea in high myopia,” Vision Research, vol. 48, no. 21, pp. 2167–2171, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. O. Abitbol, J. Bouden, S. Doan, T. Hoang-Xuan, and D. Gatinel, “Corneal hysteresis measured with the Ocular Response Analyzer in normal and glaucomatous eyes,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 88, no. 1, pp. 116–119, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. K. Kamiya, K. Shimizu, and F. Ohmoto, “Effect of aging on corneal biomechanical parameters using the Ocular Response Analyzer,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 888–893, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. T. Kida, J. H. K. Liu, and R. N. Weinreb, “Effects of aging on corneal biomechanical properties and their impact on 24-hour measurement of intraocular pressure,” The American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 146, no. 4, pp. 567–572, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. K. Mansouri, M. T. Leite, R. N. Weinreb, A. Tafreshi, L. M. Zangwill, and F. A. Medeiros, “Association between corneal biomechanical properties and glaucoma severity,” The American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 153, no. 3, pp. 419–427, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. P. J. Foster, D. C. Broadway, D. F. Garway-Heath et al., “Intraocular pressure and corneal biomechanics in an adult British population: the EPIC-Norfolk eye study,” Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, vol. 52, no. 11, pp. 8179–8185, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. A. Daxer, K. Misof, B. Grabner, A. Ettl, and P. Fratzl, “Collagen fibrils in the human corneal stroma: structure and aging,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 644–648, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. A. Elsheikh, B. Geraghty, P. Rama, M. Campanelli, and K. M. Meek, “Characterization of age-related variation in corneal biomechanical properties,” Journal of the Royal Society Interface, vol. 7, no. 51, pp. 1475–1485, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. N. E. Knox Cartwright, J. R. Tyrer, and J. Marshall, “Age-related differences in the elasticity of the human cornea,” Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 4324–4329, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. S. Shah, M. Laiquzzaman, I. Cunliffe, and S. Mantry, “The use of the Reichert ocular response analyser to establish the relationship between ocular hysteresis, corneal resistance factor and central corneal thickness in normal eyes,” Contact Lens and Anterior Eye, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 257–262, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. M. A. del Buey, J. A. Cristóbal, F. J. Ascaso, L. Lavilla, and E. Lanchares, “Biomechanical properties of the cornea in fuchs' corneal dystrophy,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 50, no. 7, pp. 3199–3202, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. M. T. Leite, L. M. Alencar, C. Gore et al., “Comparison of corneal biomechanical properties between healthy blacks and whites using the Ocular Response Analyzer,” The American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 150, no. 2, pp. 163–168, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. S. J. Haseltine, J. Pae, J. R. Ehrlich, M. Shammas, and N. M. Radcliffe, “Variation in corneal hysteresis and central corneal thickness among black, hispanic and white subjects,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 90, no. 8, pp. e626–e631, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  54. T. Kida, J. H. K. Liu, and R. N. Weinreb, “Effect of 24-hour corneal biomechanical changes on intraocular pressure measurement,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 47, no. 10, pp. 4422–4426, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. S. W. Chang, I. L. Tsai, F. R. Hu, L. L. K. Lin, and Y. F. Shih, “The cornea in young myopic adults,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 85, no. 8, pp. 916–920, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. Z. Jiang, M. Shen, G. Mao et al., “Association between corneal biomechanical properties and myopia in Chinese subjects,” Eye, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 1083–1089, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. A. Plakitsi, C. O'Donnell, M. A Miranda, W. N. Charman, and H. Radhakrishnan, “Corneal biomechanical properties measured with the ocular response analyser in a myopic population,” Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 404–412, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. S. Xu, A. Xu, A. Tao, J. Wang, F. Fan, and F. Lu, “Corneal biomechanical properties and intraocular pressure in high myopic anisometropia,” Eye and Contact Lens, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 204–209, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. Y. Song, N. Congdon, L. Li et al., “Corneal hysteresis and axial length among Chinese secondary school children: the xichang pediatric refractive error study (X-PRES) report no. 4,” The American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 145, no. 5, pp. 819–826, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. H. Radhakrishnan, M. A. Miranda, and C. O'Donnell, “Corneal biomechanical properties and their correlates with refractive error,” Clinical and Experimental Optometry, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 12–18, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. H. Goldmann and T. Schmidt, “On applanation tonography,” Ophthalmologica, vol. 150, no. 1, pp. 65–75, 1965. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. P. G. Davey, A. Elsheikh, and D. F. Garway-Heath, “Clinical evaluation of multiparameter correction equations for Goldmann applanation tonometry,” Eye, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 621–629, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  63. J. R. Ehrlich, S. Haseltine, M. Shimmyo, and N. M. Radcliffe, “Evaluation of agreement between intraocular pressure measurements using Goldmann applanation tonometry and Goldmann correlated intraocular pressure by Reichert's ocular response analyser,” Eye, vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 1555–1560, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. N. H. L. Bayoumi, A. S. Bessa, and A. A. K. El Massry, “Ocular Response Analyzer and Goldmann applanation tonometry: a comparative study of findings,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 627–631, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. D. Touboul, C. Roberts, J. Kérautret et al., “Correlations between corneal hysteresis, intraocular pressure, and corneal central pachymetry,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 616–622, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. K. Kamiya, M. Hagishima, F. Fujimura, and K. Shimizu, “Factors affecting corneal hysteresis in normal eyes,” Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 246, no. 10, pp. 1491–1494, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  67. M. Detry-Morel, J. Jamart, F. Hautenauven, and S. Pourjavan, “Comparison of the corneal biomechanical properties with the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) in African and Caucasian normal subjects and patients with glaucoma,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 90, no. 2, pp. e118–e124, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. J. M. González-MIijome, A. Queirós, J. Jorge, A. Díaz-Rey, and M. A. Parafita, “Intraoffice variability of corneal biomechanical parameters and Intraocular Pressure (IOP),” Optometry and Vision Science, vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 457–462, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. A. Poostchi, S. Nicholas, and A. P. Wells, “Recovery of corneal hysteresis after reduction of intraocular pressure in chronic primary angle-closure glaucoma,” The American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 149, no. 3, pp. 524–525, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  70. A. B. Cankaya, E. Beyazyildiz, D. Ileri, and F. Ozturk, “The effect of contact lens usage on corneal biomechanical parameters in myopic patients,” Cornea, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 764–769, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  71. N. Hutchings, T. L. Simpson, C. Hyun et al., “Swelling of the human cornea revealed by high-speed, ultrahigh-resolution optical coherence tomography,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 4579–4584, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  72. A. M. Moezzi, D. Fonn, J. Varikooty, and D. Richter, “Distribution of overnight corneal swelling across subjects with 4 different silicone hydrogel lenses,” Eye and Contact Lens, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 61–65, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  73. F. Lu, S. Xu, J. Qu et al., “Central corneal thickness and corneal hysteresis during corneal swelling induced by contact lens wear with eye closure,” The American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 143, no. 4, pp. 616–622, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  74. W. Lau and D. Pye, “Changes in corneal biomechanics and applanation tonometry with induced corneal swelling,” Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 3207–3214, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  75. A. Alharbi and H. A. Swarbrick, “The effects of overnight orthokeratology lens wear on corneal thickness,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 2518–2523, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  76. C. Villa-Collar, J. M. González-Méijome, A. Queirós, and J. Jorge, “Short-term corneal response to corneal refractive therapy for different refractive targets,” Cornea, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 311–316, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  77. D. Chen, A. K. C. Lam, and P. Cho, “A pilot study on the corneal biomechanical changes in short-term orthokeratology,” Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 464–471, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  78. X. J. Mao, C. C. Huang, L. Chen, and F. Lü, “A study on the effect of the corneal biomechanical properties undergoing overnight orthokeratology,” Chinese Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 209–213, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  79. A. Nieto-Bona, A. González-Mesa, C. Villa-Collar, and A. Lorente-Velázquez, “Biomechanical properties in corneal refractive therapy during adaptation period and after treatment interruption: a pilot study,” Journal of Optometry, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 164–1170, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  80. J. Jayakumar and H. A. Swarbrick, “The effect of age on short-term orthokeratology,” Optometry and Vision Science, vol. 82, no. 6, pp. 505–511, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  81. D. R. Hamilton, R. D. Johnson, N. Lee, and N. Bourla, “Differences in the corneal biomechanical effects of surface ablation compared with laser in situ keratomileusis using a microkeratome or femtosecond laser,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 34, no. 12, pp. 2049–2056, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  82. M. A. Qazi, J. P. Sanderson, A. M. Mahmoud, E. Y. Yoon, C. J. Roberts, and J. S. Pepose, “Postoperative changes in intraocular pressure and corneal biomechanical metrics. Laser in situ keratomileusis versus laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 35, no. 10, pp. 1774–1788, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  83. K. Kamiya, K. Shimizu, and F. Ohmoto, “Comparison of the changes in corneal biomechanical properties after photorefractive keratectomy and laser in situ keratomileusis,” Cornea, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 765–769, 2009. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  84. K. Kamiya, K. Shimizu, and F. Ohmoto, “Time course of corneal biomechanical parameters after laser in situ keratomileusis,” Ophthalmic Research, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 167–171, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  85. S. Shah and M. Laiquzzaman, “Comparison of corneal biomechanics in pre and post-refractive surgery and keratoconic eyes by Ocular Response Analyser,” Contact Lens and Anterior Eye, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 129–132, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  86. S. Chen, D. Chen, J. Wang, F. Lu, Q. Wang, and J. Qu, “Changes in Ocular Response Analyzer parameters after LASIK,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 279–288, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  87. D. S. Ryan, C. D. Coe, R. S. Howard, J. D. Edwards, and K. S. Bower, “Corneal biomechanics following Epi-LASIK,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 458–464, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  88. D. Gatinel, S. Chaabouni, P.-A. Adam, J. Munck, M. Puech, and T. Hoang-Xuan, “Corneal hysteresis, resistance factor, topography, and pachymetry after corneal lamellar flap,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 76–84, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  89. F. Witzel de Medeiros, A. Sinha-Roy, M. Ruiz Alves, S. E. Wilson, and W. J. Dupps, “Differences in the early biomechanical effects of hyperopic and myopic laser in situ keratomileusis,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 947–953, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  90. S. Kaushik, S. S. Pandav, A. Banger, K. Aggarwal, and A. Gupta, “Relationship between corneal biomechanical properties, central corneal thickness, and intraocular pressure across the spectrum of glaucoma,” The American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 153, no. 5, pp. 840–849, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  91. C. Kirwan, D. O'Malley, and M. O'Keefe, “Corneal hysteresis and corneal resistance factor in keratoectasia: findings using the Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer,” Ophthalmologica, vol. 222, no. 5, pp. 334–337, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  92. S. E. Avetisov, I. A. Novikov, I. A. Bubnova, A. A. Antonov, and V. I. Siplivyi, “Determination of corneal elasticity coefficient using the ORA database,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 520–524, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  93. G. Wollensak, E. Spoerl, and T. Seiler, “Stress-strain measurements of human and porcine corneas after riboflavin-ultraviolet-A-induced cross-linking,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 1780–1785, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  94. T. M. El-Raggal, “Riboflavin-ultraviolet A corneal cross-linking for keratoconus,” Middle East African Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 256–259, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  95. M. Poli, P. L. Cornut, T. Balmitgere, F. Aptel, H. Janin, and C. Burillon, “Prospective study of corneal collagen cross-linking efficacy and tolerance in the treatment of keratoconus and Corneal ectasia: 3-year results,” Cornea, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 583–590, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  96. D. I. Bettis, M. Hsu, and M. Moshirfar, “Corneal collagen cross-linking for nonectatic disorders: a systematic review,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 28, no. 11, pp. 798–807, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  97. P. Vinciguerra, E. Albè, A. M. Mahmoud, S. Trazza, F. Hafezi, and C. J. Roberts, “Intra- and postoperative variation in Ocular Response Analyzer parameters in keratoconic eyes after corneal cross-linking,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 26, no. 9, pp. 669–676, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  98. R. Gutierrez, I. Lopez, C. Villa-Collar, and J. M. Gonzalez-Meijome, “Corneal transparency after cross-linking for keratoconus: 1-year follow-up,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 28, no. 11, pp. 781–786, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  99. Y. Goldich, Y. Barkana, Y. Morad, M. Hartstein, I. Avni, and D. Zadok, “Can we measure corneal biomechanical changes after collagen cross-linking in eyes with keratoconus? A pilot study,” Cornea, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 498–502, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  100. D. P. Piñero, J. L. Alio, M. A. Teus, R. I. Barraquer, and A. Uceda-Montañés, “Modeling the intracorneal ring segment effect in keratoconus using refractive, Keratometric, and corneal aberrometric data,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 5583–5591, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  101. D. P. Piñero, J. L. Alio, A. Uceda-Montanes, B. E. Kady, and I. Pascual, “Intracorneal ring segment implantation in corneas with post-laser in situ keratomileusis keratectasia,” Ophthalmology, vol. 116, no. 9, pp. 1665–1674, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  102. S. Patel, J. Marshall, and F. W. Fitzke III, “Model for deriving the optical performance of the myopic eye corrected with an intracorneal ring,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 248–252, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  103. D. P. Piñero and J. L. Alio, “Intracorneal ring segments in ectatic corneal disease—a review,” Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 154–167, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  104. C. Dauwe, D. Touboul, C. J. Roberts et al., “Biomechanical and morphological corneal response to placement of intrastromal corneal ring segments for keratoconus,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 35, no. 10, pp. 1761–1767, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  105. E. Gorgun, R. B. Kucumen, and N. M. Yenerel, “Influence of intrastromal corneal ring segment implantation on corneal biomechanical parameters in keratoconic eyes,” Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 467–471, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  106. J. L. Alio, D. P. Piero, and A. Daxer, “Clinical outcomes after complete ring implantation in corneal ectasia using the femtosecond technology: a pilot study,” Ophthalmology, vol. 118, no. 7, pp. 1282–1290, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  107. J. M. Salgado-Borges, C. Costa-Ferreira, M. Monteiro et al., “Refractive, tomographic and biomechanical outcomes after implantation of ferrara ICRS in keratoconus patients,” International Journal of Keratoconus and Ectatic Corneal Diseases, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 16–21, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  108. D. P. Piñero, J. L. Alio, R. I. Barraquer, and R. Michael, “Corneal biomechanical changes after intracorneal ring segment implantation in Keratoconus,” Cornea, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 491–499, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  109. P. Pena-Garcia, A. Vega-Estrada, R. I. Barraquer, N. Burguera-Gimenez, and J. L. Alio, “Intracorneal ring segment in keratoconus: a model to predict visual changes induced by the surgery,” Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, vol. 53, no. 13, pp. 8447–8457, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  110. M. Mikielewicz, K. Kotliar, R. I. Barraquer, and R. Michael, “Air-pulse corneal applanation signal curve parameters for the characterisation of keratoconus,” The British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 95, no. 6, pp. 793–798, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  111. R. Ambrosio, J. S. Borges, C. Costa-Ferreira et al., “Intrastromal corneal ring segments for keratoconus: results and correlation with preoperative corneal biomechanics,” The Brazilian Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 89–99, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  112. N. M. Yenerel, R. B. Kucumen, and E. Gorgun, “Changes in corneal biomechanics in patients with keratoconus after penetrating keratoplasty,” Cornea, vol. 29, no. 11, pp. 1247–1251, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  113. M. Laiquzzaman, K. Tambe, and S. Shah, “Comparison of biomechanical parameters in penetrating keratoplasty and normal eyes using the Ocular Response Analyser,” Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 38, no. 8, pp. 758–763, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  114. M. Hosny, M. A. M. Hassaballa, and A. Shalaby, “Changes in corneal biomechanics following different keratoplasty techniques,” Clinical Ophthalmology, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 767–770, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  115. M. R. Jafarinasab, S. Feizi, M. A. Javadi, and A. Hashemloo, “Graft biomechanical properties after penetrating keratoplasty versus deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty,” Current Eye Research, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 417–421, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  116. S. Feizi, B. Einollahi, S. Yazdani, and A. Hashemloo, “Graft biomechanical properties after penetrating keratoplasty in keratoconus,” Cornea, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 855–858, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  117. J. F. Jordan, S. Joergens, S. Dinslage, T. S. Dietlein, and G. K. Krieglstein, “Central and paracentral corneal pachymetry in patients with normal tension glaucoma and ocular hypertension,” Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 244, no. 2, pp. 177–182, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  118. M. Pakravan, A. Parsa, M. Sanagou, and C. F. Parsa, “Central corneal thickness and correlation to optic disc size: a potential link for susceptibility to glaucoma,” The British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 91, no. 1, pp. 26–28, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  119. M. R. Lesk, A. S. Hafez, and D. Descovich, “Relationship between central corneal thickness and changes of optic nerve head topography and blood flow after intraocular pressure reduction in open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 124, no. 11, pp. 1568–1572, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  120. F. Bochmann, G. S. Ang, and A. Azuara-Blanco, “Lower corneal hysteresis in glaucoma patients with acquired pit of the optic nerve (APON),” Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 246, no. 5, pp. 735–738, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  121. T. Morita, N. Shoji, K. Kamiya, F. Fujimura, and K. Shimizu, “Corneal biomechanical properties in normal-tension glaucoma,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. e48–e53, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  122. N. G. Congdon, A. T. Broman, K. Bandeen-Roche, D. Grover, and H. A. Quigley, “Central corneal thickness and corneal hysteresis associated with glaucoma damage,” The American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 141, no. 5, pp. 868–875, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  123. M. Sullivan-Mee, S. C. Billingsley, A. D. Patel, K. D. Halverson, B. R. Alldredge, and C. Qualls, “Ocular Response Analyzer in subjects with and without glaucoma,” Optometry and Vision Science, vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 463–470, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  124. A. P. Wells, D. F. Garway-Heath, A. Poostchi, T. Wong, K. C. Y. Chan, and N. Sachdev, “Corneal hysteresis but not corneal thickness correlates with optic nerve surface compliance in glaucoma patients,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 49, no. 8, pp. 3262–3268, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  125. S. Shah, M. Laiquzzaman, S. Mantry, and I. Cunliffe, “Ocular response analyser to assess hysteresis and corneal resistance factor in low tension, open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension,” Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 508–513, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  126. L. Sun, M. Shen, J. Wang et al., “Recovery of corneal hysteresis after reduction of intraocular pressure in chronic primary angle-closure glaucoma,” The American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 147, no. 6, pp. 1061–1066, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  127. G. Mangouritsas, G. Morphis, S. Mourtzoukos, and E. Feretis, “Association between corneal hysteresis and central corneal thickness in glaucomatous and non-glaucomatous eyes,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 87, no. 8, pp. 901–905, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  128. C. F. Burgoyne, J. Crawford Downs, A. J. Bellezza, J.-K. Francis Suh, and R. T. Hart, “The optic nerve head as a biomechanical structure: a new paradigm for understanding the role of IOP-related stress and strain in the pathophysiology of glaucomatous optic nerve head damage,” Progress in Retinal and Eye Research, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 39–73, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  129. G. S. Ang, F. Bochmann, J. Townend, and A. Azuara-Blanco, “Corneal biomechanical properties in primary open angle glaucoma and normal tension glaucoma,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 259–262, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  130. A. Anand, C. G. V. de Moraes, C. C. Teng, C. Tello, J. M. Liebmann, and R. Ritch, “Corneal hysteresis and visual field asymmetry in open angle glaucoma,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 51, no. 12, pp. 6514–6518, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  131. T. S. Prata, V. C. Lima, L. M. Guedes et al., “Association between corneal biomechanical properties and optic nerve head morphology in newly diagnosed glaucoma patients,” Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 40, no. 7, pp. 682–688, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  132. A. Kotecha, “What biomechanical properties of the cornea are relevant for the clinician?” Survey of Ophthalmology, vol. 52, no. 6, supplement 2, pp. S109–S114, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  133. K. M. Meek, S. J. Tuft, Y. Huang et al., “Changes in collagen orientation and distribution in keratoconus corneas,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 1948–1956, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  134. V. Hurmeric, A. Sahin, G. Ozge, and A. Bayer, “The relationship between corneal biomechanical properties and confocal microscopy findings in normal and keratoconic eyes,” Cornea, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 641–649, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  135. M. C. Mocan, P. T. Yilmaz, M. Irkec, and M. Orhan, “In vivo confocal microscopy for the evaluation of corneal microstructure in keratoconus,” Current Eye Research, vol. 33, no. 11-12, pp. 933–939, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  136. B. M. Fontes, R. Ambrósio Jr., D. Jardim, G. C. Velarde, and W. Nosé, “Corneal biomechanical metrics and anterior segment parameters in mild keratoconus,” Ophthalmology, vol. 117, no. 4, pp. 673–679, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  137. A. Saad, Y. Lteif, E. Azan, and D. Gatinel, “Biomechanical properties of keratoconus suspect eyes,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 2912–2916, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  138. B. M. Fontes, R. Ambrósio Jr., G. C. Velarde, and W. Nosé, “Ocular Response Analyzer measurements in keratoconus with normal central corneal thickness compared with matched normal control eyes,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 209–215, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  139. E. J. Cohen and J. S. Myers, “Keratoconus and normal-tension glaucoma: a study of the possible association with abnormal biomechanical properties as measured by corneal hysteresis,” Cornea, vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 955–970, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  140. D. P. Piñero, J. L. Alio, R. I. Barraquer, R. Michael, and R. Jiménez, “Corneal biomechanics, refraction, and corneal aberrometry in keratoconus: an integrated study,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 1948–1955, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  141. R. D. Johnson, M. T. Nguyen, N. Lee, and D. R. Hamilton, “Corneal biomechanical properties in normal, forme fruste keratoconus, and manifest keratoconus after statistical correction for potentially confounding factors,” Cornea, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 516–523, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  142. J. G. Galletti, T. Pförtner, and F. F. Bonthoux, “Improved keratoconus detection by Ocular Response Analyzer testing after consideration of corneal thickness as a confounding factor,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 202–208, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  143. R. Ambekar, K. C. Toussaint, and A. Wagoner Johnson, “The effect of keratoconus on the structural, mechanical, and optical properties of the cornea,” Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 223–236, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  144. B. M. Fontes, R. A. Junior, D. Jardim, G. C. Velarde, and W. Nosé, “Ability of corneal biomechanical metrics and anterior segment data in the differentiation of keratoconus and healthy corneas,” Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia, vol. 73, no. 4, pp. 333–337, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  145. C. Schweitzer, C. J. Roberts, A. M. Mahmoud, J. Colin, S. Maurice-Tison, and J. Kerautret, “Screening of forme fruste keratoconus with the Ocular Response Analyzer,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 51, no. 5, pp. 2403–2410, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  146. J. S. Wolffsohn, S. Safeen, S. Shah, and M. Laiquzzaman, “Changes of corneal biomechanics with keratoconus,” Cornea, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 849–854, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  147. A. P. Adamis, V. Filatov, B. J. Tripathi, and R. C. Tripathi, “Fuchs' endothelial dystrophy of the cornea,” Survey of Ophthalmology, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 149–168, 1993. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  148. K. Clemmensen and J. Hjortdal, “Intraocular pressure and corneal biomechanics in Fuchs' endothelial dystrophy and after posterior lamellar keratoplasty,” Acta Ophthalmologica, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  149. N. G. M. Wiemer, M. Dubbelman, P. J. Kostense, P. J. Ringens, and B. C. P. Polak, “The influence of chronic diabetes mellitus on the thickness and the shape of the anterior and posterior surface of the cornea,” Cornea, vol. 26, no. 10, pp. 1165–1170, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  150. R. R. Sudhir, R. Raman, and T. Sharma, “Changes in the corneal endothelial cell density and morphology in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a population-based study, sankara nethralaya diabetic retinopathy and molecular genetics study (SN-DREAMS, report 23),” Cornea, vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 1119–1122, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  151. A. Kotecha, F. Oddone, C. Sinapis et al., “Corneal biomechanical characteristics in patients with diabetes mellitus,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 36, no. 11, pp. 1822–1828, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  152. A. Scheler, E. Spoerl, and A. G. Boehm, “Effect of diabetes mellitus on corneal biomechanics and measurement of intraocular pressure,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 90, no. 6, pp. e447–e451, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  153. D. P. E. Castro, T. S. Prata, V. C. Lima, L. G. Biteli, C. G. V. de Moraes, and A. Paranhos, “Corneal viscoelasticity differences between diabetic and nondiabetic glaucomatous patients,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 341–343, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  154. Y. Goldich, Y. Barkana, Y. Gerber et al., “Effect of diabetes mellitus on biomechanical parameters of the cornea,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 715–719, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  155. A. Hager, K. Wegscheider, and W. Wiegand, “Changes of extracellular matrix of the cornea in diabetes mellitus,” Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 247, no. 10, pp. 1369–1374, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  156. A. Şahin, A. Bayer, G. Özge, and T. Mumcuoǧlu, “Corneal biomechanical changes in diabetes mellitus and their influence on intraocular pressure measurements,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 50, no. 10, pp. 4597–4604, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  157. R. J. Ambrósio Jr., D. L. Caldas, I. C. Ramos, R. T. Santos, L. N. Pimentel, and C. J. Roberts, “Corneal biomechanical assessment using dynamic ultra high-speed Scheimpflug technology noncontact tonometry (UHS-ST NCT): preliminary results,” in Proceedings of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, the American Society of Ophthalmic Administrators (ASCRS-ASOA '11), San Diego, Calif, USA, March 2011.
  158. R. Ambrósio Jr., L. P. Nogueira, D. L. Caldas et al., “Evaluation of corneal shape and biomechanics before LASIK,” International Ophthalmology Clinics, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 11–38, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  159. J. Hong, J. Xu, A. Wei et al., “A new tonometer—the Corvis ST tonometer: clinical comparison with noncontact and Goldmann applanation tonometers,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 659–665, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  160. Y. Hon and A. K. Lam, “Corneal deformation measurement using Scheimpflug noncontact tonometry,” Optometry and Vision Science, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. e1–e8, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  161. C. K. Leung, C. Ye, and R. N. Weinreb, “An ultra-high-speed Scheimpflug camera for evaluation of corneal deformation response and its impact on IOP measurement,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 2885–2892, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  162. J. A. Bonatti, S. J. Bechara, P. C. Carricondo, and N. Kara-José, “Proposal for a new approach to corneal biomechanics: dynamic corneal topography,” Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 264–267, 2009. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  163. C. Roberts, J. Marous, and A. Mahmoud, “Dynamic corneal surface topography: in vivo measurement of biomechanical properties,” in Proceedings of the Oral Communication in 19th Biennial Meeting of the International Society for Eye Research, Montreal, Canada, 2010.
  164. D. H. Glass, C. J. Roberts, A. S. Litsky, and P. A. Weber, “A viscoelastic biomechanical model of the cornea describing the effect of viscosity and elasticity on hysteresis,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 3919–3926, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  165. D. Alonso-Caneiro, K. Karnowski, B. J. Kaluzny, A. Kowalczyk, and M. Wojtkowski, “Assessment of corneal dynamics with high-speed swept source Optical Coherence Tomography combined with an air puff system,” Optics Express, vol. 19, no. 15, pp. 14188–14199, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  166. G. Scarcelli, R. Pineda, and S. H. Yun, “Brillouin optical microscopy for corneal biomechanics,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 185–190, 2012. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  167. W. J. Dupps Jr., M. V. Netto, S. Herekar, and R. R. Krueger, “Surface wave elastometry of the cornea in porcine and human donor eyes,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 66–75, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  168. J. Liu, X. He, X. Pan, and C. J. Roberts, “Ultrasonic model and system for measurement of corneal biomechanical properties and validation on phantoms,” Journal of Biomechanics, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 1177–1182, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  169. X. He and J. Liu, “A quantitative ultrasonic spectroscopy method for noninvasive determination of corneal biomechanical properties,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 50, no. 11, pp. 5148–5154, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  170. T. Deffieux, G. Montaldo, M. Tanter, and M. Fink, “Shear wave spectroscopy for in vivo quantification of human soft tissues visco-elasticity,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 313–322, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  171. M. Tanter, J. Bercoff, A. Athanasiou et al., “Quantitative assessment of breast lesion viscoelasticity: initial clinical results using supersonic shear imaging,” Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, vol. 34, no. 9, pp. 1373–1386, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  172. M. Tanter, D. Touboul, J. L. Gennisson, J. Bercoff, and M. Fink, “High-resolution quantitative imaging of cornea elasticity using supersonic shear imaging,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 28, no. 12, pp. 1881–1893, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  173. J. L. Calkins, B. F. Hochheimer, and W. J. Stark, “Corneal wound healing: holographic stress-test analysis,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 322–334, 1981. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  174. P. D. Jaycock, L. Lobo, J. Ibrahim, J. Tyrer, and J. Marshall, “Interferometric technique to measure biomechanical changes in the cornea induced by refractive surgery,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 175–184, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  175. N. E. K. Cartwright, J. R. Tyrer, and J. Marshall, “In vitro quantification of the stiffening effect of corneal cross-linking in the human cornea using radial shearing speckle pattern interferometry,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 503–508, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  176. G. Grabner, R. Eilmsteiner, C. Steindl, J. Ruckhofer, R. Mattioli, and W. Husinsky, “Dynamic corneal imaging,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 163–174, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  177. M. R. Ford, W. J. Dupps Jr., A. M. Rollins, A. S. Roy, and Z. Hu, “Method for optical coherence elastography of the cornea,” Journal of Biomedical Optics, vol. 16, no. 1, Article ID 016005, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus