The Role of Ocular Response Analyzer in Differentiation of Forme Fruste Keratoconus From Corneal Astigmatism

PURPOSE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of corneal biomechanical factors in differentiating patients with forme fruste keratoconus (FFKC) from astigmatic and normal cases. METHODS: A total of 50 eyes with FFKC, 50 with astigmatism and 50 normal eyes, were included in this study. All patients had a detailed ophthalmologic examination including slit-lamp evaluation, Goldmann tonometry, indirect fundoscopy, topography by Scheimpflug imaging biomicroscopic anterior and posterior segment examination, and corneal biomechanical and intraocular pressure evaluation with ocular response analyzer (ORA). RESULTS: All topographic findings were statistically significant among the three groups (P>0.05). Although there was no statistically significant difference in the corneal-compensated intraocular pressure (IOPcc) among the three groups, the Goldmann-correlated intraocular pressure (IOPg), corneal hysteresis (CH), and corneal resistance factor (CRF) were statistically significantly lower in the FFKC group, compared with the other groups (P<0.001). There were no statistically significant difference in the IOPg, CH, and CRF between astigmatism and control groups (P=0.99, 0.79, and 0.86, respectively). The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was greater than 0.85 for IOPg (0.80), CH (0.85), and CRF (0.90) for discriminating between FFKC and controls; whereas the AUROC was greater than 0.85 for IOPg (0.80), CH (0.79), and CRF (0.85) for discriminating between FFKC and astigmatism groups. CONCLUSION: Based on our study results, in differentiation of patients with FFKC from normal control cases or astigmatic patients, corneal biomechanical parameters play a role particularly in patients with suspicious results. We suggest using ORA in combination with corneal topography for better and more accurate diagnosis of FFKC.