Evaluation of the impact of subepithelial corneal infiltrates on corneal biomechanics after epidemic keratoconjunctivitis

Arici C., Sultan P., Mergen B.

ARQUIVOS BRASILEIROS DE OFTALMOLOGIA, vol.85, no.5, pp.478-484, 2022 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 85 Issue: 5
  • Publication Date: 2022
  • Doi Number: 10.5935/0004-2749.20220061
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, CAB Abstracts, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Veterinary Science Database, Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Page Numbers: pp.478-484
  • Keywords: Keratoconjunctivitis, Intraocular pressure, Epithelium, corneal, Adrenal cortex hormones, Cyclosporine, Tonometry, ocular, INTRAOCULAR-PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS, PHOTOREFRACTIVE KERATECTOMY, CYCLOSPORINE-A, THICKNESS, INFECTIONS
  • Istanbul University Affiliated: Yes


Purpose: To examine the effect of subepithelial corneal infiltrates on corneal biomechanical properties after epidemic keratoconjunctivitis compared to that in healthy controls. Methods: The cross-sectional study included consecutive patients with bilateral subepithelial corneal infiltrates after epidemic keratoconjunctivitis and healthy controls. Best corrected visual acuity corneal subepithelial infiltrate scoring Fantes grading scale, and central corneal thickness were measured. Corneal hysteresis corneal resistance factor Goldmann correlated intra-ocular pressure and corneal compensated intraocular pressure were assessed using an ocular response analyzer. Results: This study included 66 eyes of 33 patients with subepithelial corneal infiltrates following epidemic keratoconjunctivitis and randomly selected 37 eyes of 37 healthy volunteers. The mean Fantes and CSIS scores were 1.8 +/- 0.8 and 2.9 +/- 1.3, respectively, in the first involved eyes and 1.3 +/- 1.1 and 1.9 +/- 1.7, respectively, in the fellow eyes (p=0.009 and p=0.002, respectively). The first (526.1 +/- 28.1 mu m; p=0.005) and second involved eyes (523.4 +/- 38.1 mu m; p=0.044) had significantly thinner corneas compared to that in healthy controls (557.0 +/- 38.1 mu m). While best-corrected visual acuity showed a positive correlation with corneal resistance factor (r=0.363, p=0.045) and corneal hysteresis (r=0.414, p=0.021), corneal subepithelial infiltrate scoring showed a negative correlation with Goldmann correlated intraocular pressure (r=-0.479, p=0.006) and corneal compensated intraocular pressure (r=-0.413, p=0.021). Conclusion: Eyes with subepithelial corneal infiltrates had significantly thinner corneas compared to that in healthy controls. A positive correlation of the corneal resistance factor and corneal hysteresis with best-corrected visual acuity and a negative correlation of the Goldmann correlated intraocular pressure and corneal compensated intraocular pressure with corneal subepithelial infiltrate scoring should be taken into account when measuring intraocular pressure values in patients with subepithelial corneal infiltrates.