J Korean Ophthalmol Soc.  2013 Jul;54(7):1060-1065. 10.3341/jkos.2013.54.7.1060.

Central Corneal Thickness and Corneal Endothelial Cells in Pseudoexfoliation Syndrome

• Chang IB
• Paik DW
• Kim TJ
• Ha HS
• Park JH

• KMID: 2217416
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2013.54.7.1060

Abstract

PURPOSE
To evaluate the central corneal thickness (CCT) and corneal endothelial cell density (ENDO) in pseudoexfoliation syndrome.
METHODS
Medical records of patients who underwent a preoperative examination for cataract surgery and an examination for glaucoma were retrospectively reviewed. The present study included 44 patients (59 eyes) and age- and sex-matched controls. The total pseudoexfoliation patients divided into 2 groups, such as pseudoexfoliation syndrome (28 eyes) and pseudoexfoliative glaucoma (21 eyes) .The intraocular pressure (IOP), CCT, ENDO, corneal curvature (CC) and axial length (AL) were measured.
RESULTS
The total pseudoexfoliation group showed significantly higher IOP (p = 0.001), thinner CCT (p = 0.003) and lower ENDO (p = 0.037). The pseudoexfoliation syndrome group showed significantly thinner CCT (p = 0.010) and lower EDNO (p = 0.041), but no significant difference in IOP (p = 0.941). There was no significant difference in CCT (p = 0.060) and ENDO (p = 0.171) between the pseudoexfoliative glaucoma group and controls, but the pseudoexfolliative glaucoma group showed significantly higher IOP (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
The pseudoexfoliation group showed thinner CCT which should be taken into consideration when evaluating IOP with the applanation tonometer and diagnosing glaucoma, especially in pseudoexfoliation syndrome patients.

Keyword

Central corneal thickness; Corneal curvature; Corneal endothelial cell density; Pseudoexfoliation syndrome

MeSH Terms

Cataract
Endothelial Cells
Exfoliation Syndrome
Glaucoma
Humans
Intraocular Pressure
Medical Records
Retrospective Studies

Reference

References

1. Choi J, Park KH. Clinical characteristics of Korean patients with pseudoexfoliation syndrome. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2006; 47:577–86.

2. Naumann GOH, Schlötzer-Schrehardz U, Küchle M. Pseudoex- foliation syndrome for the comprehensive ophthalmologist. Intraocular and systemic manifestations. Ophthalmology. 1998; 105:951–68.

3. Ritch R. Exfoliation syndrome. Ritch R, Shields MB, Krupin T, editors. The Glaucomas, 2nd ed. St. Louis: CV Mosby Co;1996. v. 2:p. chap. 47.

4. Ritch R, Schlötzer-Schrehardz U. Exfoliation syndrome. Surv Ophthalmol. 2001; 45:265–315.

5. Arnarsson A, Damji KF, Sverrisson T, et al. Pseudoexfoliation in the Reykjavik Eye Study: prevalence and related ophthalmological variables. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2007; 85:822–7.

6. Seo JY, Park IW, Chung YS. Diverse types of glaucoma in patients with pseudoexfoliation syndrome: Normal pressure glaucoma. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2011; 52:1455–60.

7. Jeng SM, Karger RA, Hodge DO, et al. The risk of glaucoma in pseudoexfoliation syndrome. J Glaucoma. 2007; 16:117–21.

8. Kozart DM, Yanoff M. Intraocular pressure status in 100 consec-utive patients with exfoliation syndrome. Ophthalmology. 1982; 89:214–8.

9. Henry JC, Krupin T, Schmitt M, et al. Long-term follow-up of pseudoexfoliation and the development of elevated intraocular pressure. Ophthalmology. 1987; 94:545–52.

10. Aasved H. Intraocular pressure in eyes with and without fi-brillopathia epitheliocapsularis (so-called senile exfoliation or pseudoexfoliation). Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1971; 49:601–10.

11. Cashwell LF Jr, Shields MB. Exfoliation syndrome. Prevalence in a southeastern United States population. Arch Ophthalmol. 1988; 106:335–6.

12. Hiller R, Sperduto RD, Krueger DE. Pseudoexfoliation, intra-ocular pressure, and senile lens changes in a population-based survey. Arch Ophthalmol. 1982; 100:1080–2.

13. Kivelä T, Hietanen J, Uusitalo M. Autopsy analysis of clinically unilateral exfoliation syndrome. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997; 38:2008–15.

14. Naumann GO, Schlötzer-Schrehardt U, Küchle M. Pseudoexfoliation syndrome for the comprehensive ophthalmologist. Intraocular and systemic manifestations. Ophthalmology. 1998; 105:951–68.

15. Gorezis S, Christos G, Stefaniotou M, et al. Comparative results of central corneal thickness measurements in primary open-angle glaucoma, pseudoexfoliation glaucoma, and ocular hypertension. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2008; 39:17–21.

16. Doughty MJ, Zaman ML. Human corneal thickness and its impact on intraocular pressure measures: a review and metaanalysis approach. Surv Ophthalmol. 2000; 44:367–408.

17. Bayraktar S, Bayraktar Z. Central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure relationship in eyes with and without previous LASIK: comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometer with pneuma- tonometer. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2005; 15:81–8.

18. Allingham RR, Damji KF, Freedman S, et al. Intraocular pressure and tonometry. Allingham RR, Damji KF, Freedman S, editors. Shields' Textbook of Glaucoma, 6th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Wilkins;2011. p. chap. 2.

19. 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; 120:714–20.

20. Hepsen IF, Yağ ci R, Keskin U. Corneal curvature and central cor-neal thickness in eyes with pseudoexfoliation syndrome. Can J Ophthalmol. 2007; 42:677–80.

21. Rüfer F, Westphal S, Erb C. Comparison of central and peripheral corneal thicknesses between normal subjects and patients with pri-mary open angle glaucoma, normal tension glaucoma and pseu-doexfoliation glaucoma. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd. 2007; 224:636–40.

22. Aghaian E, Choe JE, Lin S, Stamper RL. Central corneal thickness of Caucasians, Chinese, Hispanics, Filipinos, African Americans, and Japanese in a glaucoma clinic. Ophthalmology. 2004; 111:2211–9.

23. Puska P, Vasara K, Harju M, Setälä K. Corneal thickness and cor-neal endothelium in normotensive subjects with unilateral exfolia-tion syndrome. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2000; 238:659–63.

24. Stefaniotou M, Kalogeropoulos C, Razis N, Psilas K. The cornea in exfoliation syndrome. Doc Ophthalmol. 1992; 80:329–33.

25. Ozcura F, Aydin S, Dayanir V. Central corneal thickness and cor-neal curvature in pseudoexfoliation syndrome with and without glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2011; 20:410–3.

26. Inoue K, Okugawa K, Oshika T, Amano S. Morphological study of corneal endothelium and corneal thickness in pseudoexfoliation syndrome. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2003; 47:235–9.

27. Wali UK, Bialasiewicz AA, Rizvi SG, Al-Belushi H. In vivo morphometry of corneal endothelial cells in pseudoexfoliation ker-atopathy with glaucoma and cataract. Ophthalmic Res. 2009; 41:175–9.

28. Naumann GO, Küchle M. Primary corneal graft failure. Arch Ophthalmol. 1996; 114:1031.

29. Anderson DR, Patella VM. Automated Static Perimetry. St. Louis: Mosby Year Book;1992. p. 123.

30. Aasved H. Prevalence of fibrillopathia epitheliocapsularis (pseudoexfoliation) and capsular glaucoma. Trans Ophthalmol Soc U K. 1975; 99:293–5.

31. Mitchell P, Wang JJ, Hourihan F. The relationship between glauco-ma and pseudoexfoliation: The Blue Mountains Eye Study. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999; 117:1319–24.

32. Slagsvold JE. The follow-up in patients with pseudoexfoliation of the lens capsule with and without glaucoma. 2. The development of glaucoma in persons with pseudoexfoliation. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1986; 64:241–5.

33. Leskea MC, Heijl A, Hyman L, et al. Factors for progression and glaucoma treatment: the early manifest glaucoma trial. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2004; 15:102–6.

34. Copt RP, Thomas R, Mermoud A. Corneal thickness in ocular hy-pertension, primary open-angle glaucoma, and normal tension glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999; 117:14–6.

35. Detorakis ET, Koukoula S, Chrisohoou F, et al. Central corneal me-chanical sensitivity in pseudoexfoliation syndrome. Cornea. 2005; 24:688–91.

36. Bechmann M, Thiel MJ, Roesen B, et al. Central corneal thickness determined with optical coherence tomography in various types of glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000; 84:1233–7.

37. Mark HH. Corneal curvature in applanation tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol. 1973; 76:223–4.

38. Ozcura F, Aydin S, Uzgören N. Effects of central corneal thickness, central corneal power, and axial length on intraocular pressure measurement assessed with Goldmann applanation tonometry. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2008; 52:353–6.

39. Su DH, Wong TY, Foster PJ, et al. Central corneal thickness and its associations with ocular and systemic factors: the Singapore Malay Eye Study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2009; 147:709–16.

40. Oliveira C, Tello C, Liebmann J, Ritch R. Central corneal thickness is not related to anterior scleral thickness or axial length. J Glaucoma. 2006; 15:190–4.

41. Shimmyo M, Orloff PN. Corneal thickness and axial length. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005; 139:553–4.

42. Schlötzer-Schrehardt U, Naumann GO. Ocular and systemic pseu-doexfoliation syndrome. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006; 141:921–37.