Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jul 11;36(1):17-24.
doi: 10.4103/sjopt.sjopt_192_21. eCollection 2022 Jan-Mar.

Corneal biomechanics for corneal ectasia: Update

Louise P G Esporcatte  1   2   3 , Marcella Q Salomão  1   2   3   4   5 , Nelson S Junior  6 , Aydano P Machado  3   4   7 , Érica Ferreira  1   6 , Tomás Loureiro  8 , Renato A Junior  1   2   3   4   6
Affiliations

Corneal biomechanics for corneal ectasia: Update

Louise P G Esporcatte et al. Saudi J Ophthalmol. .

Abstract

Knowledge of biomechanical principles has been applied in several clinical conditions, including correcting intraocular pressure measurements, planning and following corneal treatments, and even allowing an enhanced ectasia risk evaluation in refractive procedures. The investigation of corneal biomechanics in keratoconus (KC) and other ectatic diseases takes place in several steps, including screening ectasia susceptibility, the diagnostic confirmation and staging of the disease, and also clinical characterization. More recently, investigators have found that the integration of biomechanical and tomographic data through artificial intelligence algorithms helps to elucidate the etiology of KC and ectatic corneal diseases, which may open the door for individualized or personalized medical treatments in the near future. The aim of this article is to provide an update on corneal biomechanics in the screening, diagnosis, staging, prognosis, and treatment of KC.

Keywords: Corneal biomechanics; corneal ectasia; corneal imaging.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(a and b) Corvis ST tomographic biomechanical display (Ambrósio, Roberts, and Vinciguerra) from both eyes. Note that despite a relatively normal anterior tomographic assessment (top right), we can observe abnormal tomographic and biomechanical index values of 0.46 and 0.75 in OD and OS, respectively
Figure 2
Figure 2
Corvis ST tomographic biomechanical display (Ambrósio, Roberts, and Vinciguerra) from OD (a) and OS (b). (a) Despite a relatively normal anterior tomographic assessment on the Pentacam (top right), corneal deformation response revealed an abnormal tomographic and biomechanical index value of 1.0. (b) Note on the Pentacam tomographic assessment (top right) that the front surface curvature demonstrates a moderate keratoconus condition on this eye
Figure 3
Figure 3
The Vinciguerra Screening Report from Corvis ST evidencing abnormal biomechanical parameters in OD (a) and OS (b), with more change values in OS (b)
Figure 4
Figure 4
Pentacam differential map showing in A stability in OD (A-C) and in B progression in OS (B-D). Observing only K max, we tend to believe that the keratoconus has improved from 60.6 in 02.2021 to 59.5 in 08.2021
Figure 5
Figure 5
Corvis ST tomographic biomechanical display (Ambrósio, Roberts, and Vinciguerra) from OD (a) and OS (b). The diagnosis of forme fruste keratoconus was confirmed by the tomographic and biomechanical index of 0.53 in OD (a)
Figure 6
Figure 6
The Belin ABCD display shows stability between 6 months in the OD and progression in OS
Figure 7
Figure 7
(a and b) Corvis ST tomographic biomechanical display (Ambrósio, Roberts, and Vinciguerra) from both eyes from a 13-year-old father's patient. Despite having a relatively normal anterior tomographic map, we can observe abnormal tomographic and biomechanical index values of 0.65 and 1.0 in OD and OS, respectively
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Luz A, Faria-Correia F, Salomao MQ, Lopes BT, Ambrosio R., Jr Corneal biomechanics: Where are we? J Curr Ophthalmol. 2016;28:97–8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Roberts CJ, Dupps WJ., Jr Biomechanics of corneal ectasia and biomechanical treatments. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014;40:991–8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Esporcatte LPG, Salomao MQ, Lopes BT, Vinciguerra P, Vinciguerra R, Roberts C, et al. Biomechanical diagnostics of the cornea. Eye Vis (Lond) 2020;7:9. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ambrosio R, Jr, Randleman JB. Screening for ectasia risk: What are we screening for, and how should we screen for it? J Refract Surg. 2013;29:230–2. - PubMed
    1. Gomes JA, Tan D, Rapuano CJ, Belin MW, Ambrósio R, Jr, Guell JL, et al. Global consensus on keratoconus and ectatic diseases. Cornea. 2015;34:359–69. - PubMed