A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Quantitative anatomical differences in central corneal thickness values determined with scanning-slit corneal topography and noncontact specular microscopy. | LitMetric

Purpose: This study was designed to analyze the differences in central corneal thickness values determined with noncontact specular microscopy and scanning-slit corneal topography. The measurements were performed on the same eye.

Methods: We analyzed the central corneal thickness values of 93 patients (n = 93) by means of noncontact specular microscopy (Topcon SP-2000P noncontact specular microscope, Topcon Corp., Tokyo, Japan) and scanning-slit corneal topography (Orbscan Topography System II, Orbscan Inc., Salt Lake City, UT). One experienced physician performed 3 consecutive central corneal thickness measurements with both devices.

Results: The central corneal thickness values obtained by means of Orbscan pachymetry were 17 +/- 2.7 (range, 12-24) microm greater. A significant correlation was observed between scanning-slit corneal topography and noncontact specular microscopy (Pearson correlation coefficient, r = 0.976; P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Researchers should know of the existence of this difference between noncontact specular microscopy and Orbscan pachymetry when interpreting central corneal thickness values.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.ico.0000176605.72129.2cDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

central corneal
24
corneal thickness
24
noncontact specular
24
thickness values
20
specular microscopy
20
scanning-slit corneal
16
corneal topography
16
corneal
10
differences central
8
values determined
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!