Affiliation:
1. Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases; National Myopia Institute
Abstract
The article presents data on modern methods of diagnosis and monitoring of keratoconus. The main pathognomonic signs are described according to routine research methods: biomicroscopy, viso-, autoref- and keratometry, as well as special research methods such as keratotopography, keratotomography, optical coherence tomography, aberrometry, confocal microscopy and the study of biomechanical properties of the cornea. The “gold standard” in the diagnosis of subclinical keratoconus, today, is scanning keratotomography on a Scheimpfl ug camera with the Belin-Ambrósio enhanced ectasia protocol embedded in the device
Publisher
Academy of Medical Optics and Optometry
Reference27 articles.
1. Avetisov S.E. Keratoconus: modern approaches to pathogenetic studies, diagnosis, optical correction and treatment. Bulletin of Ophthalmology. 2014;130(6):37–43. (In Russ.)
2. Averich V.V., Egorova G.B. Ocular aberrations in keratoconus. Russian Journal of Clinical Ophthalmology. 2022;22(3):168– 174. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32364/2311-7729-2022-22-3-168-174
3. Kennedy R.H., Bourne W.M., Dyer L.A. A 48-year clinical and epidemiologic study of keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol. 1986;101(3):267–273.
4. Avetisov S.E., Novikov I.A., Pateiuk L.S. Keratoconus: etiological factors and accompanying manifestations. Bulletin of Ophthalmology. 2014;130(4):110–116. (In Russ.)
5. Abugova T.D., Morozov S.G., Blosfeld V.B. New aspects of the keratoconus problem. Eye. 2004;1:8–13. (In Russ.)