Comparison of central corneal thickness (CCT) and intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with pseudoexfoliation and healthy individuals without pseudoexfoliation
, 1
Abstract
Background: The aim of a study was to compare the central corneal thickness (CCT) and intraocular pressure
(IOP) in patients with pseudoexfoliation (PXF) and age-matched healthy individuals without PXF.
Material and methods: This prospective comparative study was conducted at the Medical College Hospital in South India. The study was conducted on 100 patients who were divided into two groups. Patients with PXF were categorized as group 1 (50 patients) and healthy normal individuals without PXF as group 2 (50 patients). Visual acuity was recorded using Snellen’s visual acuity chart. Anterior segment examination was done using a slit lamp. Central corneal thickness was measured using ultrasonic pachymetry. Intraocular pressure was measured using Goldmann applanation tonometer and corrected intraocular pressure (IOP) after pachymetry.
Results: In group 1 mean age of patients was 64.76 ± 5.5 years. 18 (32%) were females, 32 (64%) were males. In group 2 mean age was 61.56 ± 5.1 years, with 29 (58%) males and 21 (42%) females. Central corneal thickness was significantly thinner in patients with PXF than in controls. The mean CCT in the PXF group was 536 ± 24 microns and the control group 561 ± 25 microns with a p-value of 0.03, which was statistically significant. Mean corrected IOP in the PXF group was 16.698 ± 6.70 mm Hg, and in the control group was 13.66 ± 2.14 mm Hg with p-value 0.00, which was statistically significant.
Conclusion: The study shows that corneas are thinner in patients with PXF as compared to controls. Hence CCT should be done in all the PXF patients, and the corrected IOP should be measured to prevent the false low estimation of IOP.
Keywords: PXFpseudoexfoliationIOPintraocular pressurecorrected IOPcorrected intraocular pressureCCTcentral corneal thickness
References
- Thorleifsson G, Magnusson KP, Sulem P, et al. Common sequence variants in the LOXL1 gene confer susceptibility to exfoliation glaucoma. Science. 2007; 317(5843): 1397–1400.
- Ritch R, Schlötzer-Schrehardt U. Exfoliation Syndrome. Surv Ophthalmology. 2001; 45(4): 265–315.
- Tan JSL, Wang JJ, Flood V, et al. Blue Mountains Eye Study, Blue Mountains Eye Study. Diabetes, fasting blood glucose and age-related maculopathy: The Blue Mountains Eye Study. Aust N Z J Ophthalmol. 1999; 27(3-4): 197–199.
- Özcura F, Aydin S, Dayanir V. Central Corneal Thickness and Corneal Curvature in Pseudoexfoliation Syndrome With and Without Glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2011; 20(7): 410–413.
- Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002; 120(6): 714–20; discussion 829.
- Hepsen IF, Yağci R, Keskin U. Corneal curvature and central corneal thickness in eyes with pseudoexfoliation syndrome. Can J Ophthalmol. 2007; 42(5): 677–680.
- Krysik K, Dobrowolski D, Polanowska K, et al. Measurements of Corneal Thickness in Eyes with Pseudoexfoliation Syndrome: Comparative Study of Different Image Processing Protocols. J Healthc Eng . 2017; 4315238.
- Sultana N. Evaluation of Central Corneal Thickness and clinical ocular profile of Patients presenting with Pseudoexfoliation at a tertiary care centre. Indian J Clin ExOphthalmol. 2019; 5(4): 543–551.
- Mccarty CA, Taylor HR. Pseudoexfoliation syndrome in Australian adults. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000; 129(5): 629–633.
- Spoorthy S, Chandra S. Central corneal thickness and curvature changes in pseudoexfoliation eyes in comparison with normal eyes. Int J Health Clin Res. 2020; 3(5): 63–66.
- Firdous SG, Asritha B, Kaveripakam SR, et al. Comparision of central corneal thickness in pseudoexfoliation syndrome and pseudoexfoliation glaucoma. IP Int J Ocul Oncol Oculoplasty. 2019; 5(4): 229–232.
- Padmanaban S, Sathya Priya P, et al. Central Corneal Thickness In Individuals With And Without Pseudo Exfoliation Syndrome — A Prospective Study. J Dent Med Sci. 2018; 17(5): 19–23.