Medmont Meridia™: Much More Than a Corneal Topographer

References

• Jones L, Ng A, Schulze M, Walsh K. Clinical Diagnostic Instruments. In: Efron N, editor. Contact Lens Practice. 4th ed. Elsevier; 2023:357–387.
   Google Scholar
• Bevara A, Vaddavalli PK. The evolution of diagnostics for keratoconus: from ophthalmometry to biomechanics. Semin Ophthalmol. 2023;38(3):265–274. doi:10.1080/08820538.2022.2152716
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fan R, Chan TC, Prakash G, Jhanji V. Applications of corneal topography and tomography: a review. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2018;46(2):133–146. doi:10.1111/ceo.13136
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santodomingo-Rubido J, Carracedo G, Suzaki A, Villa-Collar C, Vincent SJ, Wolffsohn JS. Keratoconus: an updated review. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2022;45(3):101559. doi:10.1016/j.clae.2021.101559
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker M. Mapping out corneal topography. Rev Optom. 2017;154(8):60–64.
   Google Scholar
• Young G, Schnider C, Hunt C, Efron S. Corneal topography and soft contact lens fit. Optom Vis Sci. 2010;87(5):358–366. doi:10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181d9519b
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binder PS. Videokeratography. CLAO J. 1995;21(2):133–144.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Seitz B, Behrens A, Langenbucher A. Corneal topography. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 1997;8(4):8–24. doi:10.1097/00055735-199708000-00003
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Swartz T, Marten L, Wang M. Measuring the cornea: the latest developments in corneal topography. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2007;18(4):325–333. doi:10.1097/ICU.0b013e3281ca7121
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Read SA, Collins MJ, Iskander DR, Davis BA. Corneal topography with scheimpflug imaging and videokeratography: comparative study of normal eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35(6):1072–1081. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.01.020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanclerz P, Khoramnia R, Wang X. Current developments in corneal topography and tomography. Diagnostics. 2021;11(8):1466. doi:10.3390/diagnostics11081466
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belin MW, Khachikian SS. An introduction to understanding elevation-based topography: how elevation data are displayed - A review. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2009;37(1):14–29. doi:10.1111/j.1442-9071.2008.01821.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho P, Lam AK, Mountford J, Ng L. The performance of four different corneal topographers on normal human corneas and its impact on orthokeratology lens fitting. Optom Vis Sci. 2002;79(3):175–183. Erratum in: Optom Vis Sci. doi:10.1097/00006324-200203000-00012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gonzalez-Meijome JM, Jorge J, Queiros A, Almeida JB, Parafita MA. A comparison of the ARK-700A autokeratometer and medmont E300 corneal topographer when measuring peripheral corneal curvature. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2004;24(5):391–398. doi:10.1111/j.1475-1313.2004.00203.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chui WS, Cho P. A comparative study of the performance of different corneal topographers on children with respect to orthokeratology practice. Optom Vis Sci. 2005;82(5):420–427. doi:10.1097/01.opx.0000162642.24885.71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gumus K, Gire A, Pflugfelder SC. The impact of the Boston ocular surface prosthesis on wavefront higher-order aberrations. Am J Ophthalmol Apr. 2011;151(4):682–690 e2. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2010.10.027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vincent SJ, Cho P, Chan KY, et al. CLEAR - orthokeratology. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2021;44(2):240–269. doi:10.1016/j.clae.2021.02.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sindt C, Grout T, Kojima R. Evaluating virtual fitting for keratoconus. CL Spectrum. 2011;26(5):39–43.
   Google Scholar
• Efron N, Morgan PB, Katsara SS. Validation of grading scales for contact lens complications. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2001;21(1):17–29. doi:10.1046/j.1475-1313.1999.00420.x-i1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson RC, Wolffsohn JS. Objective grading of the anterior eye. Optom Vis Sci. 2009;86(3):273–278. doi:10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181981976
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Efron N. Grading scales for contact lens complications. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1998;18(2):182–186. doi:10.1016/s0275-5408(97)00066-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Begley C, Caffery B, Chalmers R, Situ P, Simpson T, Nelson JD. Review and analysis of grading scales for ocular surface staining. Ocul Surf Apr. 2019;17(2):208–220. doi:10.1016/j.jtos.2019.01.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulze MM, Hutchings N, Simpson TL. The perceived bulbar redness of clinical grading scales. Optom Vis Sci. 2009;86(11):E1250–8. doi:10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181bb4225
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terry RL, Schnider CM, Holden BA, et al. CCLRU standards for success of daily and extended wear contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci. 1993;70(3):234–243. doi:10.1097/00006324-199303000-00011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sook Chun Y, Park IK. Reliability of 4 clinical grading systems for corneal staining. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014;157(5):1097–1102. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2014.02.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woods J, Varikooty J, Fonn D, Jones LW. A novel scale for describing corneal staining. Clin Ophthalmol. 2018;12(12):2369–2375. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S178113
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wolffsohn JS, Arita R, Chalmers R, et al. TFOS DEWS II diagnostic methodology report. Ocul Surf. 2017;15(3):539–574. doi:10.1016/j.jtos.2017.05.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamberts DW, Foster CS, Perry HD. Schirmer test after topical anesthesia and the tear meniscus height in normal eyes. Arch Ophthalmol. 1979;97(6):1082–1085. doi:10.1001/archopht.1979.01020010536004
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Savini G, Barboni P, Zanini M. Tear meniscus evaluation by optical coherence tomography. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2006;37(2):112–118. doi:10.3928/1542-8877-20060301-06
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Miller WL, Doughty MJ, Narayanan S, et al. A comparison of tear volume (by tear meniscus height and phenol red thread test) and tear fluid osmolality measures in non-lens wearers and in contact lens wearers. Eye Cont Lens. 2004;30(3):132–137. doi:10.1097/01.icl.0000138714.96401.2b
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Srinivasan S, Chan C, Jones L. Apparent time-dependent differences in inferior tear meniscus height in human subjects with mild dry eye symptoms. Clin Exp Optom. 2007;90(5):345–350. doi:10.1111/j.1444-0938.2007.00174.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alonso-Caneiro D, Turuwhenua J, Iskander DR, Collins MJ. Diagnosing dry eye with dynamic-area high-speed videokeratoscopy. J Biomed Opt. 2011;16(7):076012. doi:10.1117/1.3598837
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szczesna-Iskander DH, Iskander DR, Read SA, Alonso-Caneiro D. Noninvasive in vivo assessment of soft contact lens type on tear film surface quality. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53(1):525–531. doi:10.1167/iovs.11-8257
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyagi G, Alonso-Caneiro D, Collins M, Read S. Tear film surface quality with rigid and soft contact lenses. Eye Cont Lens. 2012;38(3):171–178. doi:10.1097/ICL.0b013e31824da99c
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szczesna-Iskander DH. Comparison of tear film surface quality measured in vivo on water gradient silicone hydrogel and hydrogel contact lenses. Eye Cont Lens. 2014;40(1):23–27. doi:10.1097/ICL.0000000000000008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szczesna-Iskander DH, Iskander DR. Tear film dynamics on soft contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci. 2014;91(12):1406–1411. doi:10.1097/OPX.0000000000000416
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downie LE. Automated tear film surface quality breakup time as a novel clinical marker for tear hyperosmolarity in dry eye disease. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015;56(12):7260–7268. doi:10.1167/iovs.15-17772
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szczesna DH, Alonso-Caneiro D, Iskander DR, Read SA, Collins MJ. Predicting dry eye using noninvasive techniques of tear film surface assessment. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(2):751–756. doi:10.1167/iovs.10-5173
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serramito M, Privado-Aroco A, Batres L, Carracedo GG. Corneal surface wettability and tear film stability before and after scleral lens wear. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2019;42(5):520–525. doi:10.1016/j.clae.2019.04.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alonso-Caneiro D, Iskander DR, Collins MJ. Tear film surface quality with soft contact lenses using dynamic-area high-speed videokeratoscopy. Eye Cont Lens. 2009;35(5):227–231. doi:10.1097/ICL.0b013e3181b3350f
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong S, Srinivasan S, Murphy PJ, Jones L. Comparison of meibomian gland dropout using two infrared imaging devices. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2019;42(3):311–317. doi:10.1016/j.clae.2018.10.014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srinivasan S, Menzies K, Sorbara L, Jones L. Infrared imaging of meibomian gland structure using a novel keratograph. Optom Vis Sci. 2012;89(5):788–794. doi:10.1097/OPX.0b013e318253de93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arita R, Minoura I, Morishige N, et al. Development of definitive and reliable grading scales for meibomian gland dysfunction. Am J Ophthalmol. 2016;169:125–137. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2016.06.025
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomlinson A, Bron AJ, Korb DR, et al. The international workshop on meibomian gland dysfunction: report of the diagnosis subcommittee. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(4):2006–2049. doi:10.1167/iovs.10-6997f
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arita R, Fukuoka S, Morishige N. New insights into the morphology and function of meibomian glands. Exp Eye Res. 2017;163(163):64–71. doi:10.1016/j.exer.2017.06.010
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Petricek I, Tomic M, Bulum T, Lesin Gacina D, Vidas Pauk S. Meibomian gland assessment in routine ophthalmology practice. Metabolites. 2023;13(2):157. doi:10.3390/metabo13020157
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nichols KK, Foulks GN, Bron AJ, et al. The international workshop on meibomian gland dysfunction: executive summary. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(4):1922–1929. doi:10.1167/iovs.10-6997a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gu T, Du B, Bi H, et al. Meibomian gland dropout, not distortion, can distinguish dry eyes from normal eyes in contact lens wearers. Curr Eye Res. 2020;45(8):897–903. doi:10.1080/02713683.2020.1731829
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alghamdi WM, Markoulli M, Holden BA, Papas EB. Impact of duration of contact lens wear on the structure and function of the meibomian glands. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2016;36(2):120–131. doi:10.1111/opo.12278
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Na KS, Yoo YS, Hwang HS, Mok JW, Kim HS, Joo CK. The influence of overnight orthokeratology on ocular surface and meibomian glands in children and adolescents. Eye Cont Lens. 2016;42(1):68–73. doi:10.1097/ICL.0000000000000196
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osae EA, Jones L, Nichols JJ. The impact of contact lenses on meibomian gland morphology. Ocul Surf. 2022;24:148–155. doi:10.1016/j.jtos.2022.04.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiffman RM, Christianson MD, Jacobsen G, Hirsch JD, Reis BL. Reliability and validity of the ocular surface disease index. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118(5):615–621. doi:10.1001/archopht.118.5.615
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nishant P, Ramawat A, Shrinkhal N, Gupta N, Mittal SK. Correlation of meiboscale symptom score and sign score for primary meibomian gland dysfunction in Indian eyes - A cross-sectional study. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2022;70(6):1958–1962. doi:10.4103/ijo.IJO_10_22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pult H. Improved meiboscale for meibography; 2016. Available from: https://wwwheiko-pultde/media/files/MEIBOSCALE-2016--Einseiterpdf. Accessed November 14, 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Tang W, Collins MJ, Carney L, Davis B. The accuracy and precision performance of four videokeratoscopes in measuring test surfaces. Optom Vis Sci. 2000;77(9):483–491. doi:10.1097/00006324-200009000-00009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar