Scholarlink

Background <p>Keratoconus is a&#xa0;progressive, ectatic corneal disease with considerable potential for visual impairment, especially in advanced stages. Early and precise diagnostics are crucial to avoid progression of the disease.</p> Objective <p>Modern diagnostic procedures for recognizing keratoconus, including subclinical stages are presented and evaluated.</p> Material and methods <p>Analysis of current imaging and biomechanical procedures, e.g., Scheimpflug tomography, optical coherence tomography (OCT) and the Corvis ST (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany), including combined indices (e.g., BAD‑D, SCORE) and epithelium-based analyses, taking the current classification systems (ABCD, Amsler-Krumeich) into account.</p> Results <p>Tomographic procedures enable detailed analysis of the anterior and posterior cornea as well as the pachymetric distribution. Biomechanical measurements complement the morphological assessment. Combined indices increase the sensitivity in the detection of subclinical cases. Nevertheless, diagnostic uncertainties remain in very early cases.</p> Conclusion <p>Modern multimodal diagnostics greatly improve the detection and follow-up of keratoconus; however, the diagnosis of subclinical forms remains challenging, highlighting the importance for frequent follow-up controls.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Diagnostische Innovationen zur Früherkennung und Charakterisierung des Keratokonus

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月4日

查看全文
  • Maximilian Friedrich,
  • Hyeck-Soo Son,
  • Gerd Uwe Auffarth,
  • Victor Aristide Augustin

摘要

Background

Keratoconus is a progressive, ectatic corneal disease with considerable potential for visual impairment, especially in advanced stages. Early and precise diagnostics are crucial to avoid progression of the disease.

Objective

Modern diagnostic procedures for recognizing keratoconus, including subclinical stages are presented and evaluated.

Material and methods

Analysis of current imaging and biomechanical procedures, e.g., Scheimpflug tomography, optical coherence tomography (OCT) and the Corvis ST (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany), including combined indices (e.g., BAD‑D, SCORE) and epithelium-based analyses, taking the current classification systems (ABCD, Amsler-Krumeich) into account.

Results

Tomographic procedures enable detailed analysis of the anterior and posterior cornea as well as the pachymetric distribution. Biomechanical measurements complement the morphological assessment. Combined indices increase the sensitivity in the detection of subclinical cases. Nevertheless, diagnostic uncertainties remain in very early cases.

Conclusion

Modern multimodal diagnostics greatly improve the detection and follow-up of keratoconus; however, the diagnosis of subclinical forms remains challenging, highlighting the importance for frequent follow-up controls.