MARATTO

article · Benha Medical Journal

Comparative Study of Central Corneal Thickness in Healthy Individuals and Diabetic Patients with and Without Retinopathy using Pentacam

2024Open accessBenha University

Abstract

Background: Precise evaluation of Central Corneal Thickness (CCT) is crucial for both tracking the activity of corneal endothelial cells and detecting corneal disorders including keratoconus and Fuchs Endothelial Corneal Dystrophy. The aim of this work was to use pentacam to measure CCT and generate CCT maps in diabetic patients with and without retinopathy and contrast those with normal subjects. Patients and methods: This comparative cross-sectional study was executed on 75 subjects. They were split into three equal groups: (Group A): diabetic patients without diabetic retinopathy; (Group B): diabetic patients with diabetic retinopathy while (Group C): non-diabetic individuals. All groups were subjected to pentacam to measure CCT and generate corneal thickness maps to compare CCT concerning different groups.Results: A statistically significant difference was detected in CCT across the groups. Patients with diabetes who did not have retinopathy had CCT that was not significantly different from those who did. It has been demonstrated that patients with diabetes mellitus who have had the condition for more than ten years have a significantly higher mean CCT than those who have had it for less than ten years. CCT showed a positive correlation with age, RBS, haemoglobin A1c (HBA1c) and DM duration. A significant correlation was existed between CCT and period of DM. Conclusion: A statistically significant variation was detected in CCT between diabetic patients and normal controls. Age, RBS, HBA1c, and the length of DM can all have positive correlations with CCT.

Research topics

  • Retinal and Optic Conditions
  • Glaucoma and retinal disorders
  • Retinal Diseases and Treatments

Sustainable Development Goals

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.21608/bmfj.2024.290175.2083

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.