ABSTRACT
Purpose: To evaluate whether the inter-eye asymmetry of keratoconus (KC) patients is different from a healthy control group and to investigate how asymmetry changes with increasing severity of the disease.
Methods: In this retrospective study, we included both eyes of 350 patients with KC (age 35 ± 13 years) and 68 candidates planned for refractive surgery (control group, age 37 ± 11 years). Inclusion criteria for the KC group were keratoconus in at least one eye with Pentacam Topographical Keratoconus Classification (TKC) of at least 0.5. Patients eligible for refractive surgery in both eyes were included in the control group.
Corneal tomography as well as Ocular Response Analyzer measurements were compared between both groups. Subgroup analysis was performed with respect to the TKC staging. Asymmetry was provided as worse eye (defined by higher TKC) minus fellow eye.
Results: In the KC group, both eyes showed the same TKC staging in 30.6%, a difference of one stage in 34.0% and of two stages in 24.6% of the patients. The inter-eye asymmetry in the keratoconus group was significantly larger than that in the control group. Corneal power showed an asymmetry of 3.8 ± 4.0 D in keratoconus eyes versus 0.22 ± 0.17 D in the control group. Central corneal thickness (CCT) asymmetry was 34 ± 30 µm versus 6 ± 5 µm, respectively. The Keratoconus Match Index showed an asymmetry of 0.40 ± 0.35 versus 0.15 ± 0.14. The difference between both eyes increased with increasing TKC of the worse eye.
Conclusions: Inter-eye asymmetry is larger in keratoconus than in normal eyes, and it increases with keratoconus severity in the worse eye.
Acknowledgments
Part of the material in this manuscript has been presented as a poster at the Annual Meeting of the German Ophthalmological Society (DOG) in 2016, at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) 2017 and at the Special Interest Symposium about Keratoconus at the Annual Meeting of the European Association of Vision and Eye Research (EVER) in 2017.
Declaration of interest
The authors have no conflict of interest.