275 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28880338)
1. Comparison of Corneal Deformation Parameters in Keratoconic and Normal Eyes Using a Non-contact Tonometer With a Dynamic Ultra-High-Speed Scheimpflug Camera.
Mercer RN; Waring GO; Roberts CJ; Jhanji V; Wang Y; Filho JS; Hemings RA; Rocha KM
J Refract Surg; 2017 Sep; 33(9):625-631. PubMed ID: 28880338
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of Corneal Dynamic and Tomographic Analysis in Normal, Forme Fruste Keratoconic, and Keratoconic Eyes.
Wang YM; Chan TCY; Yu M; Jhanji V
J Refract Surg; 2017 Sep; 33(9):632-638. PubMed ID: 28880339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Introduction of Two Novel Stiffness Parameters and Interpretation of Air Puff-Induced Biomechanical Deformation Parameters With a Dynamic Scheimpflug Analyzer.
Roberts CJ; Mahmoud AM; Bons JP; Hossain A; Elsheikh A; Vinciguerra R; Vinciguerra P; Ambrósio R
J Refract Surg; 2017 Apr; 33(4):266-273. PubMed ID: 28407167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Assessment of ocular biomechanics using dynamic ultra high-speed Scheimpflug imaging in keratoconic and normal eyes.
Tian L; Ko MW; Wang LK; Zhang JY; Li TJ; Huang YF; Zheng YP
J Refract Surg; 2014 Nov; 30(11):785-91. PubMed ID: 25291757
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Diagnostic Ability of Corneal Shape and Biomechanical Parameters for Detecting Frank Keratoconus.
Sedaghat MR; Momeni-Moghaddam H; Ambrósio R; Heidari HR; Maddah N; Danesh Z; Sabzi F
Cornea; 2018 Aug; 37(8):1025-1034. PubMed ID: 29847493
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Biomechanical responses of healthy and keratoconic corneas measured using a noncontact scheimpflug-based tonometer.
Ali NQ; Patel DV; McGhee CN
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2014 May; 55(6):3651-9. PubMed ID: 24833745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of corneal dynamic parameters and tomographic measurements using Scheimpflug imaging in keratoconus.
Chan TC; Wang YM; Yu M; Jhanji V
Br J Ophthalmol; 2018 Jan; 102(1):42-47. PubMed ID: 28559422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Corneal biomechanical properties in keratoconic and normal eyes].
Wei SS; Li Y; Li J; Liu JG; Ye L; Wan YQ; Li J; Du J
Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2016 Sep; 52(9):669-73. PubMed ID: 27647247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Assessment of corneal biomechanical parameters in healthy and keratoconic eyes using dynamic bidirectional applanation device and dynamic Scheimpflug analyzer.
Herber R; Ramm L; Spoerl E; Raiskup F; Pillunat LE; Terai N
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2019 Jun; 45(6):778-788. PubMed ID: 30902432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluation of new Corvis ST parameters in normal, Post-LASIK, Post-LASIK keratectasia and keratoconus eyes.
Yang K; Xu L; Fan Q; Gu Y; Song P; Zhang B; Zhao D; Pang C; Ren S
Sci Rep; 2020 Mar; 10(1):5676. PubMed ID: 32231236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Detection of Keratoconus With a New Biomechanical Index.
Vinciguerra R; Ambrósio R; Elsheikh A; Roberts CJ; Lopes B; Morenghi E; Azzolini C; Vinciguerra P
J Refract Surg; 2016 Dec; 32(12):803-810. PubMed ID: 27930790
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Corneal Biomechanics in Unilateral Keratoconus and Fellow Eyes with a Scheimpflug-based Tonometer.
Catalán-López S; Cadarso-Suárez L; López-Ratón M; Cadarso-Suárez C
Optom Vis Sci; 2018 Jul; 95(7):608-615. PubMed ID: 29957740
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Keratoconus Screening With Dynamic Biomechanical In Vivo Scheimpflug Analyses: A Proof-of-Concept Study.
Steinberg J; Amirabadi NE; Frings A; Mehlan J; Katz T; Linke SJ
J Refract Surg; 2017 Nov; 33(11):773-778. PubMed ID: 29117418
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Variability of Corneal Deformation Response in Normal and Keratoconic Eyes.
Ye C; Yu M; Lai G; Jhanji V
Optom Vis Sci; 2015 Jul; 92(7):e149-53. PubMed ID: 26002009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Reliability analysis of successive Corneal Visualization Scheimpflug Technology measurements in different keratoconus stages.
Flockerzi E; Häfner L; Xanthopoulou K; Daas L; Munteanu C; Langenbucher A; Seitz B
Acta Ophthalmol; 2022 Feb; 100(1):e83-e90. PubMed ID: 33750037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Biomechanical assessment of healthy and keratoconic corneas (with/without crosslinking) using dynamic ultrahigh-speed Scheimpflug technology and the relevance of the parameter (A1L-A2L).
Fuchsluger TA; Brettl S; Geerling G; Kaisers W; Franko Zeitz P
Br J Ophthalmol; 2019 Apr; 103(4):558-564. PubMed ID: 29871966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Biomechanical Analysis of Subclinical Keratoconus With Normal Topographic, Topometric, and Tomographic Findings.
Koc M; Aydemir E; Tekin K; Inanc M; Kosekahya P; Kiziltoprak H
J Refract Surg; 2019 Apr; 35(4):247-252. PubMed ID: 30984982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Repeatability and reproducibility of corneal deformation response parameters of dynamic ultra-high-speed Scheimpflug imaging in keratoconus.
Herber R; Vinciguerra R; Lopes B; Raiskup F; Pillunat LE; Vinciguerra P; Ambrósio R
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2020 Jan; 46(1):86-94. PubMed ID: 32050237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of Corneal Biomechanical Indices in Distinguishing Between Normal, Very Asymmetric, and Bilateral Keratoconic Eyes.
Herber R; Hasanli A; Lenk J; Vinciguerra R; Terai N; Pillunat LE; Raiskup F
J Refract Surg; 2022 Jun; 38(6):364-372. PubMed ID: 35686712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Dynamic Scheimpflug-based assessment of keratoconus and the effects of corneal cross-linking.
Bak-Nielsen S; Pedersen IB; Ivarsen A; Hjortdal J
J Refract Surg; 2014 Jun; 30(6):408-14. PubMed ID: 24972407
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
