We have located links that may give you full text access.
Central corneal thickness in mucopolysaccharidosis II and VI.
Cornea 2010 March
OBJECTIVE: To describe the ultrasonographically detected central corneal thickness (CCT) in patients with Type II and VI mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS) and its impact on applanation tonometry and glaucoma detection.
METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with MPS (19 MPS II, nine MPS VI) underwent pachymetric investigation of CCT. Additionally, ultrasound measurements of axial length of the globe, slit-lamp evaluation with semiquantitative grading of corneal clouding, applanation tonometry, and assessment of refractive error were performed.
RESULTS: Median average corneal thickness was 534.5 microm (range, 491.5-579.0 microm) in the MPS II and 547.0 microm (range, 492.5-693.05 microm) in the MPS VI group. CCT depended on degree of corneal clouding and patients' age, but did not correlate with intraocular pressure, refractive error, axial length, or MPS type. There were no substantial differences in refractive error between MPS II and MPS VI.
CONCLUSION: In our patients, CCT in MPS II and VI did not differ statistically significantly from age-related values found in healthy subjects. Thus, intraocular pressure readings detected by applanation tonometry in MPS II and VI in the majority of patients can be regarded as reliable. In the case of clinically marked corneal clouding, measurement of CCT is recommended to adequately assess intraocular pressure and possible coexistent glaucoma.
METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with MPS (19 MPS II, nine MPS VI) underwent pachymetric investigation of CCT. Additionally, ultrasound measurements of axial length of the globe, slit-lamp evaluation with semiquantitative grading of corneal clouding, applanation tonometry, and assessment of refractive error were performed.
RESULTS: Median average corneal thickness was 534.5 microm (range, 491.5-579.0 microm) in the MPS II and 547.0 microm (range, 492.5-693.05 microm) in the MPS VI group. CCT depended on degree of corneal clouding and patients' age, but did not correlate with intraocular pressure, refractive error, axial length, or MPS type. There were no substantial differences in refractive error between MPS II and MPS VI.
CONCLUSION: In our patients, CCT in MPS II and VI did not differ statistically significantly from age-related values found in healthy subjects. Thus, intraocular pressure readings detected by applanation tonometry in MPS II and VI in the majority of patients can be regarded as reliable. In the case of clinically marked corneal clouding, measurement of CCT is recommended to adequately assess intraocular pressure and possible coexistent glaucoma.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app