These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Journal Abstract Search
412 related items for PubMed ID: 30199566
1. Comparison of Corneal Tomography and a New Combined Tomographic Biomechanical Index in Subclinical Keratoconus. Chan TCY, Wang YM, Yu M, Jhanji V. J Refract Surg; 2018 Sep 01; 34(9):616-621. PubMed ID: 30199566 [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 01; 33(9):632-638. PubMed ID: 28880339 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Integration of Scheimpflug-Based Corneal Tomography and Biomechanical Assessments for Enhancing Ectasia Detection. Ambrósio R, Lopes BT, Faria-Correia F, Salomão MQ, Bühren J, Roberts CJ, Elsheikh A, Vinciguerra R, Vinciguerra P. J Refract Surg; 2017 Jul 01; 33(7):434-443. PubMed ID: 28681902 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. 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 01; 37(8):1025-1034. PubMed ID: 29847493 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Combined corneal biomechanical and tomographical indices in subclinical and forme fruste keratoconus. Ganesh M, Arora R, Titiyal JS. Indian J Ophthalmol; 2024 Sep 01; 72(9):1337-1345. PubMed ID: 38990626 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. 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 01; 38(6):364-372. PubMed ID: 35686712 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. 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 01; 43(5):1465-1475. PubMed ID: 36255612 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Biomechanical Analysis of Tomographically Regular Keratoconus Fellow Eyes Using Corvis ST. Augustin VA, Son HS, Kovalchuk B, Yildirim TM, Köppe MK, Auffarth GU, Khoramnia R. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2023 Aug 01; 240(8):944-951. PubMed ID: 37567232 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparative analysis of the morphological and biomechanical properties of normal cornea and keratoconus at different stages. Wu Y, Guo LL, Tian L, Xu ZQ, Li Q, Hu J, Huang YF, Wang LQ. Int Ophthalmol; 2021 Nov 01; 41(11):3699-3711. PubMed ID: 34232432 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Keratoconus Screening Indices and Their Diagnostic Ability to Distinguish Normal From Ectatic Corneas. Shetty R, Rao H, Khamar P, Sainani K, Vunnava K, Jayadev C, Kaweri L. Am J Ophthalmol; 2017 Sep 01; 181():140-148. PubMed ID: 28687218 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of Ectasia Detection in Early Keratoconus Using Scheimpflug-Based Corneal Tomography and Biomechanical Assessments. Wallace HB, Vellara HR, Gokul A, McGhee CNJ, Meyer JJ. Cornea; 2023 Dec 01; 42(12):1528-1535. PubMed ID: 36973879 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Next] [New Search]