206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33654120)
1. Accuracy of new Corvis ST parameters for detecting subclinical and clinical keratoconus eyes in a Chinese population.
Ren S; Xu L; Fan Q; Gu Y; Yang K
Sci Rep; 2021 Mar; 11(1):4962. PubMed ID: 33654120
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Performance of Corvis ST Parameters Including Updated Stress-Strain Index in Differentiating Between Normal, Forme-Fruste, Subclinical, and Clinical Keratoconic Eyes.
Miao YY; Ma XM; Qu ZX; Eliasy A; Wu BW; Xu H; Wang P; Zheng XB; Wang JJ; Ye YF; Chen SH; Elsheikh A; Bao FJ
Am J Ophthalmol; 2024 Feb; 258():196-207. PubMed ID: 37879454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Corneal biomechanics in normal and subclinical keratoconus eyes.
Peyman A; Sepahvand F; Pourazizi M; Noorshargh P; Forouhari A
BMC Ophthalmol; 2023 Nov; 23(1):459. PubMed ID: 37968616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of Belin/Ambrósio Enhanced Ectasia and Corvis ST parameters for subclinical keratoconus.
Song Y; Feng Y; Qu M; Ma Q; Tian H; Li D; He R
Int Ophthalmol; 2023 May; 43(5):1465-1475. PubMed ID: 36255612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Application of a scheimpflug-based biomechanical analyser and tomography in the early detection of subclinical keratoconus in chinese patients.
Liu Y; Zhang Y; Chen Y
BMC Ophthalmol; 2021 Sep; 21(1):339. PubMed ID: 34544392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Biomechanical properties analysis of forme fruste keratoconus and subclinical keratoconus.
Huo Y; Chen X; Cao H; Li J; Hou J; Wang Y
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2023 May; 261(5):1311-1320. PubMed ID: 36441226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Repeatability and comparison of new Corvis ST parameters in normal and keratoconus eyes.
Yang K; Xu L; Fan Q; Zhao D; Ren S
Sci Rep; 2019 Oct; 9(1):15379. PubMed ID: 31653884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accuracy of Scheimpflug-derived corneal biomechanical and tomographic indices for detecting subclinical and mild keratectasia in a South Asian population.
Kataria P; Padmanabhan P; Gopalakrishnan A; Padmanaban V; Mahadik S; Ambrósio R
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2019 Mar; 45(3):328-336. PubMed ID: 30527442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Relationship between corneal biomechanical parameters and corneal sublayer thickness measured by Corvis ST and UHR-OCT in keratoconus and normal eyes.
Li Y; Xu Z; Liu Q; Wang Y; Lin K; Xia J; Chen S; Hu L
Eye Vis (Lond); 2021 Jan; 8(1):2. PubMed ID: 33419485
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Agreement of Corrected Intraocular Pressure Values Between Corvis ST and Pentacam in Patients With Keratoconus, Subclinical Keratoconus, and Normal Cornea.
Chen Y; Rong H; Liu W; Liu G; Du B; Jin C; Wei R
Cornea; 2021 Nov; 40(11):1426-1432. PubMed ID: 33734163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Early Diagnosis of Keratoconus in Chinese Myopic Eyes by Combining Corvis ST with Pentacam.
Zhang M; Zhang F; Li Y; Song Y; Wang Z
Curr Eye Res; 2020 Feb; 45(2):118-123. PubMed ID: 31466466
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Machine learning analysis with the comprehensive index of corneal tomographic and biomechanical parameters in detecting pediatric subclinical keratoconus.
Ren S; Yang K; Xu L; Fan Q; Gu Y; Pang C; Zhao D
Front Bioeng Biotechnol; 2023; 11():1273500. PubMed ID: 38125302
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. [Evaluation of two biomechanical stiffness indexes in the diagnosis of eratoconus and their changes after corneal collagen cross-linking surgery].
Liu GY; Jing LL; Li J; Du XL
Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2022 Aug; 58(8):584-591. PubMed ID: 35959602
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. CorNet: Autonomous feature learning in raw Corvis ST data for keratoconus diagnosis via residual CNN approach.
Zhang P; Yang L; Mao Y; Zhang X; Cheng J; Miao Y; Bao F; Chen S; Zheng Q; Wang J
Comput Biol Med; 2024 Apr; 172():108286. PubMed ID: 38493602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. Accuracy of an Air-Puff Dynamic Tonometry Biomarker to Discriminate the Corneal Biomechanical Response in Patients With Keratoconus.
Lombardo G; Alunni-Fegatelli D; Serrao S; Mencucci R; Roszkowska AM; Bernava GM; Vestri A; Aleo D; Lombardo M
Cornea; 2024 Mar; 43(3):315-322. PubMed ID: 37964435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of the morphological and biomechanical characteristics of keratoconus, forme fruste keratoconus, and normal corneas.
Guo LL; Tian L; Cao K; Li YX; Li N; Yang WQ; Jie Y
Semin Ophthalmol; 2021 Nov; 36(8):671-678. PubMed ID: 33734947
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
