D T Ramsey1, J G Hauptman, S M Petersen-Jones. 1. Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing 48824-1314, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare corneal thickness, intraocular pressure, and optical corneal diameter in Rocky Mountain Horses with cornea globosa and those with clinically normal corneas. ANIMALS: 129 Rocky Mountain Horses. PROCEDURE: Ultrasonic pachymetry was used to measure corneal thickness. Applanation tonometry was used to measure intraocular pressure. A Jameson caliper was used to measure optical corneal diameter. RESULTS: The central and temporal peripheral portions of the cornea were significantly thicker in horses with cornea globosa than in horses with clinically normal corneas, but corneal thicknesses in the dorsal, ventral, and medial peripheral portions of the cornea were not significantly different between groups. There were no differences in corneal thickness between male and female horses or between right and left eyes. However, there was a positive correlation between age and corneal thickness. Intraocular pressure was not significantly different between horses with cornea globosa and those with clinically normal corneas, or between right and left eyes, or male and female horses. Optical corneal diameter for horses with cornea globosa was not significantly different from diameter for horses with clinically normal corneas, but optical corneal diameter was positively correlated with age. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Cornea globosa in Rocky Mountain Horses is not associated with increased intraocular pressure. Corneal thickness and optical corneal diameter increase with age in Rocky Mountain Horses.
OBJECTIVE: To compare corneal thickness, intraocular pressure, and optical corneal diameter in Rocky Mountain Horses with cornea globosa and those with clinically normal corneas. ANIMALS: 129 Rocky Mountain Horses. PROCEDURE: Ultrasonic pachymetry was used to measure corneal thickness. Applanation tonometry was used to measure intraocular pressure. A Jameson caliper was used to measure optical corneal diameter. RESULTS: The central and temporal peripheral portions of the cornea were significantly thicker in horses with cornea globosa than in horses with clinically normal corneas, but corneal thicknesses in the dorsal, ventral, and medial peripheral portions of the cornea were not significantly different between groups. There were no differences in corneal thickness between male and female horses or between right and left eyes. However, there was a positive correlation between age and corneal thickness. Intraocular pressure was not significantly different between horses with cornea globosa and those with clinically normal corneas, or between right and left eyes, or male and female horses. Optical corneal diameter for horses with cornea globosa was not significantly different from diameter for horses with clinically normal corneas, but optical corneal diameter was positively correlated with age. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Cornea globosa in Rocky Mountain Horses is not associated with increased intraocular pressure. Corneal thickness and optical corneal diameter increase with age in Rocky Mountain Horses.
Authors: Kelly E Knickelbein; Mary E Lassaline; Soohyun Kim; Machal S Scharbrough; Sara M Thomasy Journal: Vet Ophthalmol Date: 2022-01-27 Impact factor: 1.444
Authors: Bruce H Grahn; Chantale Pinard; Sheila Archer; Rebecca Bellone; George Forsyth; Lynne S Sandmeyer Journal: Can Vet J Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 1.008
Authors: Lisa S Andersson; Katarina Lyberg; Gus Cothran; David T Ramsey; Rytis Juras; Sofia Mikko; Björn Ekesten; Susan Ewart; Gabriella Lindgren Journal: Mamm Genome Date: 2011-04-05 Impact factor: 2.957
Authors: Lisa S Andersson; Rytis Juras; David T Ramsey; Jessica Eason-Butler; Susan Ewart; Gus Cothran; Gabriella Lindgren Journal: BMC Genet Date: 2008-12-19 Impact factor: 2.797
Authors: Lisa S Andersson; Maria Wilbe; Agnese Viluma; Gus Cothran; Björn Ekesten; Susan Ewart; Gabriella Lindgren Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-09-23 Impact factor: 3.240