Is it Possible to Derive the Dresdner Correction Formula Using a Finite Element Program?

Abstract

Introduction The aim was to construct a model cornea by CAD and finite element software to find out how the intraocular pressure compares to the forces for applanation at the outside of the model cornea. These data were to be compared to the Dresdner correction formula. Thereby, it was possible to find out whether the model was plausible and to find hints as to why a correction for how the intraocular pressure depends on the corneal thickness is necessary at all.

Methods Using the open-source software FreeCad and geometrical data for the cornea of the literature, an average cornea was constructed. On this average cornea, a finite element analysis was performed using the free software z88aurora. The intraocular pressure was measured by applanation of the outer cornea. The necessary forces were analysed.

Results In this model, the intraocular pressure had to be corrected depending on the corneal thickness. The correction factor was k_{mean; finite elements} = 19.17 – 0.0334*corneal thickness. The necessary correction did not exclusively depend on the relation between the endothelial area and the area of the outer cornea: for this relation alone the correction would have been k_{area-relation} = 1.0361 – 0.0006*corneal thickness.

Discussion The model correction formula was close to the Dresdner formula. The relation between endothelial area and the area of the outer cornea could only explain about half of the necessary correction.

Key words

FreeCad - z88aurora - finite-element-analysis - cornea - Dresden correction formula

Publication History

Received: 13 December 2020

Accepted: 24 March 2021

Article published online:
09 July 2021

• References/Literatur

• 1 Nejad TM, Foster C, Gongal D. Finite element modelling of cornea mechanics: a review. Arq Bras Oftalmol 2014; 77: 60-66
• 2 Truffer O, Abler D, Pajic B. et al. Optimization of surgical parameters based on patient-specific models: application to arcuate keratotomy. J Cataract Refract Surg 2019; 45: 1084-1091
• 3 Nguyen BA, Roberts CJ, Reilly MA. Biomechanical impact of the sclera on corneal deformation response to an air-puff: A finite-element study. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2019; 6: 210
• 4 Shih PJ, Wang IJ, Cai WF. Biomechanical simulation of stress concentration and intraocular pressure in corneas subjected to myopic refractive surgical procedures. Sci Rep 2017; 7: 13906
• 5 Simonini I, Pandolfi A. Customized finite element modelling of the human cornea. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0130426 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130426.
• 6 Kohlhaas M, Boehm AG, Spoerl E. et al. Effect of central corneal thickness, corneal curvature, and axial length on applanation tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol 2006; 124: 471-476
• 7 Boeckmann N. Vergleich zur Messung des vorderen Augenabschnittes (Hornhautdicke, Vorderkammertiefe und Linsendicke) anhand des Visante OCTs und des AC Masters [Dissertation]. Bochum: Ruhr-Universität Bochum; 2013
• 8 Jonuscheit S, Doughty MJ, Button NF. On the use of Orbscan II to assess the peripheral corneal thickness in humans: a comparison with ultrasound pachimetry measures. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2007; 27: 179-189
• 9 Whitford C. Biomechanical properties of the ocular globe based on ex vivo testing and multiscale numerical modelling [Dissertation]. Liverpool: University of Liverpool; 2016
• 10 Knox Cartwright NE, Tyrer JR, Marshall J. Age-Related differences in the elasticity of the human cornea. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2011; 52: 4324-4329
• 11 Feltgen N, Leifert D, Funk J. Correlation between central corneal thickness, applanation tonometry, and direct intracameral IOP readings. Br J Ophthalmol 2001; 85: 85-87
• 12 Ehlers N, Bramsen T, Sperling S. Applanation tonometry and central corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1975; 53: 34-43
• 13 Wollensak G, Elena I. Long-term biomechanical properties of rabbit sclera after collagen crosslinking using riboflavin and ultraviolet A (UVA). Acta Ophthalmol 2009; 87: 193-198
• 14 Wollensak G, Hammer CM, Spörl E. et al. Biomechanical efficacy of collagen crosslinking in porcine cornea using a femtosecond laser pocket. Cornea 2014; 33: 300-305
• 15 Spiru B, Torres-Netto EA, Kling S. et al. Biomechanical properties of human cornea tested by two-dimensional extensiometry ex vivo in fellow eyes: PRK versus SMILE. J Refract Surg 2019; 35: 501-505
• 16 Joaquín F, Rodríguez-Vallejo M, Martínez JOD. et al. Corneal biomechanics after laser refractive surgery: Unmasking differences between techniques. J Cataract Refract Surg 2018; 44: 390-398
• 17 Mikula ER, Jester JV, Juhasz T. Measurement of an elasticity map in the human cornea. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2016; 57: 3282-3286
• 18 Wang H, Prendiville PL, McDonnell PJ. et al. An ultrasonic technique for the measurement of the elastic moduli of human cornea. J Biomech 1996; 29: 1633-1636
• 19 Gerhard A, Holzapfel T, Gasser C. et al. A new constitutive framework for arterial wall mechanics and a comparative study of material models. J Elast 2000; 61: 1-48
• 20 Elsheikh A, Whitforda C, Hamarashida R. et al. Stress free configuration of the human eye. Med Eng Phys 2013; 35: 211-216
• 21 Businaro E, Studer H, Pajic B. et al. Gaussian process prediction of the stress-free configuration of pre-deformed soft tissues: Application to the human cornea. Med Eng Phys 2016; 12: 1-7
• 22 Ramirez-Garcia MA, Sloan SR, Nidenberg B. et al. Depth-dependent out-of-plane Youngʼs modulus of the human cornea. Curr Eye Res 2018; 43: 595-604