BJO

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Published Online First: 17 May 2006. doi:10.1136/bjo.2006.096370
British Journal of Ophthalmology 2006;90:1103-1106
Copyright © 2006 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
bjo.2006.096370v1
90/9/1103    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Simsek, T
Right arrow Articles by Batman, A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Simsek, T
Right arrow Articles by Batman, A
Topic Collections
Right arrowRelated Article

SCIENTIFIC REPORT

Glaucoma and increased central corneal thickness in aphakic and pseudophakic patients after congenital cataract surgery

T Simsek1, A H Mutluay2, U Elgin1, R Gursel2, A Batman1

1 Department of Glaucoma, Ulucanlar Teaching and Research Eye Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
2 Department of Pediatric Ophthalmology, Ulucanlar Teaching and Research Eye Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Tulay Simsek
Turan Gunes Bulvari, 41 Sokak, I.Akturk Sitesi, 8/20 06450, Oran Yolu, Ankara, Turkey; tulaysimsek{at}hotmail.com


ABSTRACT
Aim: To compare the mean central corneal thickness (CCT) among aphakic and pseudophakic patients following congenital cataract surgery with age matched controls.

Methods: This study included 43 eyes of 43 aphakic and pseudophakic patients following congenital cataract surgery. 44 healthy, age and sex matched volunteers were recruited for comparison with the patients. After a complete eye examination, corneal thickness and intraocular pressure were measured.

Results: In the study group, 33 eyes were aphakic, and the remaining 10 eyes were pseudophakic. The median CCT was 556.0 µm (range 490–640 µm) in the control group and 626 µm (range 523–870 µm) in the study group (p<0.05). There was a significant difference in CCT between aphakic and pseudophakic eyes in which an intraocular lens (IOL) had been implanted at the time of congenital cataract surgery (p = 0.011). The same difference was not observed between aphakic and pseudophakic eyes in which an IOL had been implanted secondarily (p = 0.835). The median age of the patients at the time of lensectomy was 24 months (range 1 week to 120 months). There was a negative correlation between the age at lensectomy and CCT (r = –0.485, p = 0.001).

Conclusion: Aphakic and pseudophakic patients have significantly thicker corneas than age matched controls. This difference can have an important effect on interpreting intraocular pressures in these patients. It is also important to assess the effects of early surgery for congenital cataracts, as well as those of primary and secondary IOL implantation, on CCT.


Abbreviations: CCT, central corneal thickness; IOL, intraocular lens; OHT, ocular hypertension

Keywords: central corneal thickness; aphakic glaucoma; congenital cataract; intraocular pressure


Related Article

BJO at a glance
Creig Hoyt
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006 90: 1073. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Br. J. Ophthalmol.Home page
A V Levin
Aphakic glaucoma: a never-ending story?
Br. J. Ophthalmol., December 1, 2007; 91(12): 1574 - 1575.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2006 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.