Literature DB >> 15864625

Accuracy of dynamic contour tonometry compared with applanation tonometry in human cadaver eyes of different hydration states.

Christoph Kniestedt1, Michelle Nee, Robert L Stamper.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In an experimental laboratory investigation we compared intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained by dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), and pneumatonometry (PTG) with intracameral manometry on human cadaver corneas of different hydration conditions.
METHODS: Ten freshly enucleated eyes were de-epithelialized. Two tubes were placed in the anterior chamber in opposite directions and connected to a transducer and to a bottle system filled with balanced salt solution. The pressure in the eye was then adjusted between 5 mmHg and 58 mmHg by electronically altering the height of the bottle. Central corneal thickness (CCT) was registered and IOP measurements were obtained with DCT, GAT, and PTG at each manometric pressure reading. Immediately after the trial the same corneas were artificially dehydrated and the same measurement regimen was repeated.
RESULTS: In the pressure range defined by the bottle height 10-50 cm, IOP values measured by DCT were 0.50 mmHg (95% CI=0.40-0.60) and 0.36 mmHg (95% CI=0.25-0.47) higher than manometric readings before and after dehydration, respectively. GAT showed consistently lower values than manometry, the difference being -3.48 mmHg (95% CI=-3.91 to -3.05) and -3.14 mmHg (95% CI=-3.39 to -2.89), respectively. Similar results were obtained with PGT, namely differences of -4.75 mmHg (95% CI=-5.21 to -4.29) and -3.98 mmHg (95% CI=-4.48 to -3.48) for the hydrated and the dehydrated corneal condition, respectively. Only DCT showed no significant change in accuracy between hydrated and dehydrated corneas.
CONCLUSIONS: In this in vitro study DCT values for IOP were significantly closer to the manometric reference pressure than those obtained using GAT and PTG, independent of the state of corneal hydration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15864625     DOI: 10.1007/s00417-004-1024-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0721-832X            Impact factor:   3.117


  29 in total

1.  [Applanation tonometry].

Authors:  H GOLDMANN; T SCHMIDT
Journal:  Ophthalmologica       Date:  1957-10       Impact factor: 3.250

2.  Distribution of central corneal thickness and its association with intraocular pressure: The Rotterdam Study.

Authors:  R C Wolfs; C C Klaver; J R Vingerling; D E Grobbee; A Hofman; P T de Jong
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 5.258

Review 3.  Human corneal thickness and its impact on intraocular pressure measures: a review and meta-analysis approach.

Authors:  M J Doughty; M L Zaman
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  2000 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.048

4.  Tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis treatment.

Authors:  S Duch; A Serra; J Castanera; R Abos; M Quintana
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 2.503

5.  The effect of corneal thickness on applanation tonometry.

Authors:  M M Whitacre; R A Stein; K Hassanein
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  1993-05-15       Impact factor: 5.258

6.  Comparison of MacKay-Marg, Goldmann, and Perkins tonometers in abnormal corneas.

Authors:  F McMillan; R K Forster
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  1975-06

7.  Dehydration of post-mortem eyes for practice and experimental surgery.

Authors:  C A Swinger; E W Kornmehl
Journal:  Ophthalmic Surg       Date:  1985-03

8.  Effect of corneal hydration and intraocular pressure on keratometric power after experimental radial keratotomy.

Authors:  R K Maloney
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Effect of corneal hydration on Goldmann applanation tonometry and corneal topography.

Authors:  G Simon; R H Small; Q Ren; J M Parel
Journal:  Refract Corneal Surg       Date:  1993 Mar-Apr

10.  Intraocular pressure measurements using dynamic contour tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis.

Authors:  Claude Kaufmann; Lucas M Bachmann; Michael A Thiel
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.799

View more
  23 in total

1.  The influence of soft contact lenses on the intraocular pressure measurement.

Authors:  P G Firat; C Cankaya; S Doganay; M Cavdar; S Duman; E Ozsoy; B Koc
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 3.775

Review 2.  [Dynamic contour tonometry].

Authors:  C Kniestedt; H E Kanngiesser
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 1.059

3.  Dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) versus Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) - a comparison of agreement and reproducibility.

Authors:  Sonja Herdener; Mona Pache; Sonja Lautebach; Jens Funk
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-12-20       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  [Influence of residual corneal bed thickness after myopic LASIK on intraocular pressure measurements. Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry].

Authors:  L Muller; T Kohnen
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 1.059

5.  Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometry, rebound tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in normal and glaucomatous eyes.

Authors:  Fatih Özcura; Nilgün Yildirim; Afsun Şahin; Ertuğrul Çolak
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-04-18       Impact factor: 1.779

6.  Comparison of ICare and IOPen vs Goldmann applanation tonometry according to international standards 8612 in glaucoma patients.

Authors:  Milena Pahlitzsch; Jeanette Brünner; Johannes Gonnermann; Anna-Karina B Maier; Necip Torun; Eckart Bertelmann; Matthias Kj Klamann
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 1.779

7.  [Evaluation of correction formulas for tonometry : The Goldmann applanation tonometry in approximation to dynamic contour tonometry].

Authors:  J Wachtl; M Töteberg-Harms; S Frimmel; C Kniestedt
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 1.059

8.  [Evaluation of dynamic contour tonometry in penetrating keratoplasties].

Authors:  An Viestenz; A Langenbucher; B Seitz; Ar Viestenz
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 1.059

9.  Correlation Between Dynamic Contour Tonometry, Uncorrected and Corrected Goldmann Applanation Tonometry, and Stage of Glaucoma.

Authors:  Josephine Wachtl; Marc Töteberg-Harms; Sonja Frimmel; Malgorzata Roos; Christoph Kniestedt
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 7.389

10.  Evaluation of a contact lens-embedded sensor for intraocular pressure measurement.

Authors:  Michael D Twa; Cynthia J Roberts; Huikai J Karol; Ashraf M Mahmoud; Paul A Weber; Robert H Small
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 2.503

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.