ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2023
Ultra-High Resolution Optical Aberrometry in Patients with Keratoconus: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Immediate Impact of Artificial Tear Composition on Optical Aberrations: A Comparative Study of Lipid and Non-Lipid Hydroxypropyl Guar Formulations.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Vision and Quality of Life in Fuchs' Endothelial Dystrophy Using a Prototype Aberrometer: A Cross-Sectional Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Fuchs' Endothelial Corneal Dystrophy evaluation using a high-resolution wavefront sensor.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparing the clinical applicability of wavefront phase imaging in keratoconus versus normal eyes.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study performs optical aberration assessment in patients using a novel ultra-high-resolution device. The objective of this study is to analyze optical aberrations, especially the very high order wavefront (more than 10th order of Zernike coefficients), and compare between keratoconus and healthy patients.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, we analyzed 43 eyes from 25 healthy patients and 43 eyes from 27 patients with keratoconus using corneal tomography and a very high-resolution (8.55 µm) aberrometer prototype (T-eyede) outfitted with a sensor originally developed for use in the field of astrophysics. Corneal aberration values were assessed using an optical model built with Zemax optical software, while ocular aberrations were assessed using T-eyede. In addition, image-processing analysis was performed of the wavefront phase, creating a high-pass filter map.
resultsWe found lower values for ocular aberrations than corneal aberrations in both groups (p < 0.001). Specifically, we found a reduction in primary astigmatism (0.145 µm) and primary coma (0.017 µm). Also, the keratoconus group showed significantly higher wavefront aberration values compared with controls (p < 0.001). An analysis of the high-pass filter map revealed 2 contrasting results: one smooth or clear, while the other presented a banding pattern. Almost all in the control group (95%) showed the first pattern, while 77% of the keratoconus group showed a banding pattern on the filtered map (chi-squared test, p < 0.001).
conclusionThis device provides reliable, precise measurements of ocular aberrations that correlate well with corneal aberrations. Furthermore, the extraordinary high-resolution measurements revealed unprecedented micro changes in the wavefront phase of patients with keratoconus that varied with disease stage. These findings could lead to new screening or follow-up methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.