ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
Repeatability of a Dual-Scheimpflug Placido Disc Corneal Tomographer/Topographer in Eyes with Keratoconus.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Purpose: To investigate the repeatability of a combined Dual-Scheimpflug placido disc corneal tomographer/topographer (Ziemer Galilei G4) with respect to keratometric indices used to monitor progression of keratoconus (KCN). Methods: Patients with KCN were prospectively enrolled. For each eye lacking history of corneal surgery, 5 measurements were taken in succession. Eyes in which 3 or more measurements could be obtained (defined by the device's 4 image quality metrics) were included in the analysis. The repeatability limits (RL) and interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated for various parameters. Results: Thirty-two eyes from 25 patients met all image quality metrics, and 54 eyes from 38 patients met at least 3/4 criteria (all except the placido image quality metric). RLs for key parameters when 4/4 or ≥3/4 image quality metrics were met included: 0.37 and 0.77 diopters (D) for steep simulated keratometry, 0.79 and 1.65 D for maximum keratometry, 13.80 and 13.88 degrees for astigmatism axis, 0.64 and 0.56 µm for vertical coma magnitude, and 3.76 and 3.84 µm for thinnest pachymetry, respectively. The ICCs for all parameters were excellent (above 0.87) except for spherical aberration (0.77), which was still considered good. Conclusion: The dual-Scheimpflug placido disc corneal tomographer/topographer is highly repeatable in quantifying parameters used in monitoring KCN. Excellent placido images are difficult to capture in eyes with KCN, but when available, increase the reliability of the measurements. When clinicians find that a topographic index changes by more than the RLs defined herein, they can have confidence that this represents real change and may appropriately recommend interventions such as corneal cross-linking or intrastromal corneal ring segments.
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.