alexa Central corneal thickness of Caucasians and African Americans in glaucomatous and nonglaucomatous populations.


Journal of Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology

Author(s): La Rosa FA, Gross RL, OrengoNania S

Abstract Share this page

Abstract OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there is a difference in central corneal thickness between African American and Caucasian patients. If present, a difference might alter the measurement of intraocular pressure and potentially the assessment and management of glaucoma in these populations. METHODS: Central corneal thickness was measured by means of ultrasound pachymetry in African American (n = 56) and Caucasian (n = 32) patients with suspected or confirmed glaucoma and control populations of African American (n = 26) and Caucasian (n = 51) subjects in whom there was no evidence of elevated intraocular pressure or glaucomatous optic nerve damage. Measurements of central corneal thickness were then compared between different subpopulations by means and population distribution analysis. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was noted between the mean (+/-SD) central corneal thickness of all African American (including those with and without glaucoma) (right eye, 531.0 +/- 36.3 microm; left eye, 530.0 +/- 34.6 microm) and all Caucasian (including those with and without glaucoma) (right eye, 558.0 +/- 34.5 microm; left eye, 557.6 +/- 34.5 microm) patients. Similar results were found when subpopulations were tested. Distribution analysis of central corneal thickness measurements noted the largest cluster of African American patients around 520 to 540 microm, whereas the largest cluster of Caucasian patients was between 580 and 600 microm. CONCLUSIONS: African Americans were found to have thinner central cornea thickness measurements than Caucasians. This finding in African Americans may lead to lower applanation intraocular pressure readings compared with those of Caucasians, potentially resulting in an underestimation of the actual level of intraocular pressure.
This article was published in Arch Ophthalmol and referenced in Journal of Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology

Relevant Expert PPTs

Relevant Speaker PPTs

Recommended Conferences

Peer Reviewed Journals
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version