Author/Authors :
Jabbarvand, Mahmoud Farabi Eye Hospital - Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran , Askarizadeh, Farshad Department of Optometry - School of Paramedical Sciences - Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad , Mohamad Reza Sedaghat, Mohamad Reza Khatam‑Al‑Anbia Hospital - Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad , Ghadimi, Hadi Farabi Eye Hospital - Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran , Khosravi, Bahram Department of Optometry - Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran , Aghazadeh Amiri, Mohammad Department of Optometry - Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran , Narooie‑Noori, Foroozan Department of Optometry - School of Paramedical Sciences - Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad
Abstract :
We express our sincere thanks to Dr. Bernardo and
Dr. Rosa for their interest in our study and their letter
on our work.[1] Bernardo and Rosa noted the significance
of central corneal thickness (CCT) in virgin eyes and
after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), as evaluated
by Pentacam HR (Scheimpflug imaging) and Orbscan II
(scanning slit topography). They concluded that the
difference between Pentacam and Orbscan in measuring
corneal thickness is related to differences in the devices,
rather than corneal changes induced by hyperopic PRK.
Keywords :
Author’s Reply , PRK , CCT , Orbscan II and Pentacam HR to determine
