Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume 2016, Article ID 3062381, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/3062381
Review Article

Applications of Scheimpflug Imaging in Glaucoma Management: Current and Potential Applications

Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA

Received 17 June 2016; Revised 6 September 2016; Accepted 4 October 2016

Academic Editor: Karim Mohamed-Noriega

Copyright © 2016 Alexander T. Nguyen 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. A. Konstantopoulos, P. Hossain, and D. F. Anderson, “Recent advances in ophthalmic anterior segment imaging: a new era for ophthalmic diagnosis?” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 551–557, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. F. Faria-Correia and R. Ambrósio Júnior, “Clinical applications of the Scheimpflug principle in Ophthalmology,” Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia, vol. 75, no. 2, pp. 160–165, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  3. N. Kurita, C. Mayama, A. Tomidokoro, M. Aihara, and M. Araie, “Potential of the Pentacam in screening for primary angle closure and primary angle closure suspect,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 506–512, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. A. Saad and D. Gatinel, “Topographic and tomographic properties of forme fruste keratoconus corneas,” Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 5546–5555, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. R. Ambrósio Jr., B. F. Valbon, F. Faria-Correia, I. Ramos, and A. Luz, “Scheimpflug imaging for laser refractive surgery,” Current Opinion in Ophthalmology, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 310–320, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. R. Ambrósio Jr., I. Ramos, A. Luz et al., “Dynamic ultra high speed scheimpflug imaging for assessing corneal biomechanical properties,” Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 99–102, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. C. K.-S. 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 Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. M. C. Leske, A. Heijl, M. Hussein, B. Bengtsson, L. Hyman, and E. Komaroff, “Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the early manifest glaucoma trial,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 121, no. 1, pp. 48–56, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. D. S. Friedman and M. He, “Anterior chamber angle assessment techniques,” Survey of Ophthalmology, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 250–273, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. N. Brown, “An advanced slit-image camera,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 56, no. 8, pp. 624–631, 1972. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. J. F. Koretz, S. A. Strenk, L. M. Strenk, and J. L. Semmlow, “Scheimpflug and high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of the anterior segment: a comparative study,” Journal of the Optical Society of America A, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 346–354, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. D. S. Grewal, G. S. Brar, R. Jain, and S. P. S. Grewal, “Comparison of Scheimpflug imaging and spectral domain anterior segment optical coherence tomography for detection of narrow anterior chamber angles,” Eye, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 603–611, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. S. D. Smith, K. Singh, S. C. Lin et al., “Evaluation of the anterior chamber angle in glaucoma: a report by the american academy of ophthalmology,” Ophthalmology, vol. 120, no. 10, pp. 1985–1997, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. G. Cairns and C. N. J. McGhee, “Orbscan computerized topography: attributes, applications, and limitations,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 205–220, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. M. Pakravan, F. Sharifipour, S. Yazdani, N. Koohestani, and M. Yaseri, “Scheimpflug imaging criteria for identifying eyes at high risk of acute angle closure,” Journal of Ophthalmic and Vision Research, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 111–117, 2012. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. H. Ishikawa, J. M. Liebmann, and R. Ritch, “Quantitative assessment of the anterior segment using ultrasound biomicroscopy,” Current Opinion in Ophthalmology, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 133–139, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. D. S. Friedman, G. Gazzard, C. B. Min et al., “Age and sex variation in angle findings among normal Chinese subjects: a comparison of UBM, scheimpflug, and gonioscopic assessment of the anterior chamber angle,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 5–10, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. D. S. Friedman, G. Gazzard, P. Foster et al., “Ultrasonographic biomicroscopy, scheimpflug photography, and novel provocative tests in contralateral eyes of Chinese patients initially seen with acute angle closure,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 121, no. 5, pp. 633–642, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. E. Antoniazzi, S. Pezzotta, A. Delfino, and P. E. Bianchi, “Anterior chamber measurements taken with Pentacam: an objective tool in laser iridotomy,” European Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 517–522, 2010. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. J. C. Talajic, M. R. Lesk, M. Nantel-Battista, and P. J. Harasymowycz, “Anterior segment changes after pilocarpine and laser iridotomy for primary angle-closure suspects with scheimpflug photography,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 776–779, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. N. Vryonis, E. Nikita, I. Vergados, P. Theodossiadis, and T. Filippopoulos, “Anterior chamber morphology before and after laser peripheral iridotomy determined by scheimpflug technology in white patients with narrow angles,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 679–683, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. Y. Acet, F. U. Yigit, I. U. Onur, A. Agachan, B. Tugcu, and O. Orum, “The course of the changes in anterior chamber parameters after laser peripheral iridotomy: follow-up for 6 months with a scheimpflug-placido disc topographer,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 14–21, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. S. Li, H. Wang, D. Mu et al., “Prospective evaluation of changes in anterior segment morphology after laser iridotomy in Chinese eyes by rotating Scheimpflug camera imaging,” Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 10–14, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. C. J. Pavlin, K. Harasiewicz, and F. S. Foster, “Ultrasound biomicroscopy of anterior segment structures in normal and glaucomatous eyes,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 113, no. 4, pp. 381–389, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. J. Gloster and E. S. Perkins, “The validity of the Imbert-Fick law as applied to applanation tonometry,” Experimental Eye Research, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 274–283, 1963. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. Y.-C. Ko, C. J.-I. Liu, and W.-M. Hsu, “Varying effects of corneal thickness on intraocular pressure measurements with different tonometers,” Eye, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 327–332, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. M. O. Gordon, J. A. Beiser, J. D. Brandt et al., “The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 120, no. 6, pp. 714–720, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. European Glaucoma Prevention Study Group, “Predictive factors for open-angle glaucoma among patients with ocular hypertension in the European Glaucoma Prevention Study,” Ophthalmology, vol. 114, no. 1, pp. 3–9, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  29. J. D. Brandt, M. O. Gordon, F. Gao, J. A. Beiser, J. P. Miller, and M. A. Kass, “Adjusting intraocular pressure for central corneal thickness does not improve prediction models for primary open-angle glaucoma,” Ophthalmology, vol. 119, no. 3, pp. 437–442, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. B. A. Francis, R. Varma, V. Chopra, M.-Y. Lai, C. Shtir, and S. P. Azen, “Intraocular pressure, central corneal thickness, and prevalence of open-angle glaucoma: the los angeles Latino Eye Study,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 146, no. 5, pp. 741–746, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. M. Fujioka, M. Nakamura, Y. Tatsumi, A. Kusuhara, H. Maeda, and A. Negi, “Comparison of Pentacam Scheimpflug camera with ultrasound pachymetry and noncontact specular microscopy in measuring central corneal thickness,” Current Eye Research, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 89–94, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. A. Yu, W. Zhao, G. Savini et al., “Evaluation of central corneal thickness using corneal dynamic scheimpflug analyzer corvis ST and comparison with pentacam rotating scheimpflug system and ultrasound pachymetry in normal eyes,” Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 2015, Article ID 767012, 8 pages, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. N. Maresca, F. Zeri, P. Palumbo, and A. Calossi, “Agreement and reliability in measuring central corneal thickness with a rotating Scheimpflug-Placido system and ultrasound pachymetry,” Contact Lens and Anterior Eye, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 442–446, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. J. Huang, X. Ding, G. Savini et al., “Central and midperipheral corneal thickness measured with Scheimpflug imaging and optical coherence tomography,” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 5, Article ID e98316, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. M. Lanza, E. Paolillo, U. A. Gironi Carnevale et al., “Central corneal thickness evaluation in healthy eyes with three different optical devices,” Contact Lens and Anterior Eye, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 409–413, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. J. C. Hernández-Camarena, P. Chirinos-Saldaña, A. Navas et al., “Repeatability, reproducibility, and agreement between three different scheimpflug systems in measuring corneal and anterior segment biometry,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 30, no. 9, pp. 616–621, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. N. Nassiri, K. Sheibani, S. Safi et al., “Central corneal thickness in highly myopic eyes: inter-device agreement of ultrasonic pachymetry, Pentacam and Orbscan II before and after photorefractive keratectomy,” Journal of Ophthalmic and Vision Research, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 14–21, 2014. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. C. O'Donnell and C. Maldonado-Codina, “Agreement and repeatability of central thickness measurement in normal corneas using ultrasound pachymetry and the OCULUS Pentacam,” Cornea, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 920–924, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. W. Buehl, D. Stojanac, S. Sacu, W. Drexler, and O. Findl, “Comparison of three methods of measuring corneal thickness and anterior chamber depth,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 141, no. 1, pp. 7–21, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. Y. Barkana, Y. Gerber, U. Elbaz et al., “Central corneal thickness measurement with the Pentacam Scheimpflug system, optical low-coherence reflectometry pachymeter, and ultrasound pachymetry,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 1729–1735, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. L.-Y. Tai, K.-W. Khaw, C.-M. Ng, and V. Subrayan, “Central corneal thickness measurements with different imaging devices and ultrasound pachymetry,” Cornea, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 766–771, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. J. Jorge, J. L. Rosado, J. A. Díaz-Rey, and J. M. González-Méijome, “Central corneal thickness and anterior chamber depth measurement by sirius® Scheimpflug tomography and ultrasound,” Clinical Ophthalmology, vol. 7, pp. 417–422, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. J. Huang, G. Savini, L. Hu et al., “Precision of a new Scheimpflug and Placido-disk analyzer in measuring corneal thickness and agreement with ultrasound pachymetry,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 219–224, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. I. A. Sigal and C. R. Ethier, “Biomechanics of the optic nerve head,” Experimental Eye Research, vol. 88, no. 4, pp. 799–807, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. A. J. Bellezza, R. T. Hart, and C. F. Burgoyne, “The optic nerve head as a biomechanical structure: initial finite element modeling,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 41, no. 10, pp. 2991–3000, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. I. A. Sigal, J. G. Flanagan, and C. R. Ethier, “Factors influencing optic nerve head biomechanics,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 46, no. 11, pp. 4189–4199, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. A. Lanzagorta-Aresti, M. Perez-Lopez, E. Palacios-Pozo, and J. Davo-Cabrera, “Relationship between corneal hysteresis and lamina cribrosa displacement after medical reduction of intraocular pressure,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  48. 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
  49. E. J. Lee, T.-W. Kim, R. N. Weinreb, M. H. Suh, and H. Kim, “Lamina cribrosa thickness is not correlated with central corneal thickness or axial length in healthy eyes: central corneal thickness, axial length, and lamina cribrosa thickness,” Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 251, no. 3, pp. 847–854, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. R. Lee, R. T. Chang, I. Y. H. Wong, J. S. M. Lai, J. W. Y. Lee, and K. Singh, “Novel parameter of corneal biomechanics that differentiate normals from glaucoma,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. e603–e609, 2016. View at Google Scholar
  51. K. E. Brown and N. G. Congdon, “Corneal structure and biomechanics: impact on the diagnosis and management of glaucoma,” Current Opinion in Ophthalmology, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 338–343, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. D. Luce and D. Taylor, “Reichert ocular response analyzer measures corneal biomechanical properties and IOP provides new indicators for corneal specialties and glaucoma management,” Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer White Paper, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  53. 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,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 141, no. 5, pp. 868–875, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. F. A. Medeiros, D. Meira-Freitas, R. Lisboa, T.-M. Kuang, L. M. Zangwill, and R. N. Weinreb, “Corneal hysteresis as a risk factor for glaucoma progression: A Prospective Longitudinal Study,” Ophthalmology, vol. 120, no. 8, pp. 1533–1540, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. M. Lanza, S. Iaccarino, and M. Bifani, “In vivo human corneal deformation analysis with a Scheimpflug camera, a critical review,” Journal of Biophotonics, vol. 9, pp. 464–477, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. A.-Y. Yu, S.-F. Duan, Y.-E. Zhao et al., “Correlation between corneal biomechanical properties, applanation tonometry and direct intracameral tonometry,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 96, no. 5, pp. 640–644, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. A. G. Boehm, A. Weber, L. E. Pillunat, R. Koch, and E. Spoerl, “Dynamic contour tonometry in comparison to intracameral IOP measurements,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 2472–2477, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. Z. Han, C. Tao, D. Zhou et al., “Air puff induced corneal vibrations: theoretical simulations and clinical observations,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 208–213, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. G. Nemeth, Z. Hassan, A. Csutak, E. Szalai, A. Berta, and L. Modis Jr., “Repeatability of ocular biomechanical data measurements with a scheimpflug-based noncontact device on normal corneas,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 29, no. 8, pp. 558–563, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. L. Reznicek, D. Muth, A. Kampik, A. S. Neubauer, and C. Hirneiss, “Evaluation of a novel Scheimpflug-based non-contact tonometer in healthy subjects and patients with ocular hypertension and glaucoma,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 97, no. 11, pp. 1410–1414, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. 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 Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. G. Jóhannesson, P. Hallberg, A. Eklund, and C. Lindén, “Pascal, ICare and Goldmann applanation tonometry—A Comparative Study,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 86, no. 6, pp. 614–621, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. A. Smedowski, B. Weglarz, D. Tarnawska, K. Kaarniranta, and E. Wylegala, “Comparison of three intraocular pressure measurement methods including biomechanical properties of the cornea,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 666–673, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. M. L. Salvetat, M. Zeppieri, C. Tosoni, M. Felletti, L. Grasso, and P. Brusini, “Corneal deformation parameters provided by the corvis-ST pachy-tonometer in healthy subjects and glaucoma patients,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 568–574, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. L. M. Brandão and M. C. Grieshaber, “Update on minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) and new implants,” Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 2013, Article ID 705915, 12 pages, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. L. T. Chylack Jr., J. K. Wolfe, D. M. Singer et al., “The lens opacities classification system III. The Longitudinal study of cataract study group,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 111, no. 6, pp. 831–836, 1993. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  67. F. Faria-Correia, B. Lopes, T. Monteiro, N. Franqueira, and R. Ambrósio Jr., “Scheimpflug lens densitometry and ocular wavefront aberrations in patients with mild nuclear cataract,” Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 405–411, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  68. K. Kránitz, K. Miháltz, G. L. Sándor, A. Takacs, M. C. Knorz, and Z. Z. Nagy, “Intraocular lens tilt and decentration measured by scheimpflug camera following manual or femtosecond laser-created continuous circular capsulotomy,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 259–263, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. K. Hayashi, H. Hayashi, F. Nakao, and F. Hayashi, “Intraocular lens tilt and decentration after implantation in eyes with glaucoma,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 1515–1520, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  70. M. Packer, S. D. Klyce, and C. Smith, “The LENSAR laser system-fs 3D for femtosecond cataract surgery,” US Ophthalmic Review, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 89–94, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar