Literature DB >> 18703945

Effect of central corneal thickness and corneal hysteresis on tonometry as measured by dynamic contour tonometry, ocular response analyzer, and Goldmann tonometry in glaucomatous eyes.

Annette Hager1, Hager Annette, Kristina Loge, Loge Kristina, Bernd Schroeder, Schroeder Bernd, Mark-Oliver Füllhas, Füllhas Mark-Oliver, Wolfgang Wiegand, Wiegand Wolfgang.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The dynamic contour tonometer (DCT; Pascal tonometer) and the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) are novel tonometers designed to measure intraocular pressure (IOP) independent of corneal properties and central corneal thickness (CCT), respectively. We wanted to compare the corneal compensated IOP (IOPcc) as measured by ORA with IOP values measured by DCT and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) with respect to IOP readings and the influence of corneal hysteresis (CH) and CCT in glaucoma patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a study of 94 glaucomatous eyes, IOP measurements by ORA, DCT, and GAT were compared, and the effects of CCT and CH were analyzed. All measurements were taken by 1 of the authors only.
RESULTS: The Mean CCT was 550+/-44 mum and mean CH 10.24+/-3.3 mm Hg. The mean value for IOPcc was 17.94+/-5.9 mm Hg, 15.14+/-3.7 mm Hg for DCT, and 14.3+/-4.3 mm Hg for GAT. The mean difference was 3.65+/-3.85 mm Hg between IOPcc and GAT and 2.80+/-4.9 mm Hg between IOPcc and DCT (P<0.001) and -0.85+/-3.3 mm Hg between GAT and DCT (P=0.015). None of the methods was related to CCT. In contrast, CH was highly statistically significant related to IOPcc (P<0.0001), whereas GAT and DCT showed only weak relation to CH (P=0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: IOP measurements with the ORA are significantly higher than DCT or GAT with no apparent linear correction factor. To date, we cannot estimate the impact of differences in CH in relation to IOP and its measurement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18703945     DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e31815c3ad3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Glaucoma        ISSN: 1057-0829            Impact factor:   2.503


  17 in total

Review 1.  [Measuring intraocular pressure by different methods].

Authors:  J Lamparter; E M Hoffmann
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.059

2.  Intraocular pressure measured by dynamic contour tonometer and ocular response analyzer in normal tension glaucoma.

Authors:  Tetsuya Morita; Nobuyuki Shoji; Kazutaka Kamiya; Mana Hagishima; Fusako Fujimura; Kimiya Shimizu
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-08-20       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 3.  Tonometers-which one should I use?

Authors:  Kanza Aziz; David S Friedman
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2018-02-19       Impact factor: 3.775

4.  The influence of corneal geometrical and biomechanical properties on tonometry readings in keratoconic eyes.

Authors:  Mustafa Değer Bilgeç; Eray Atalay; Ömer Sözer; Hüseyin Gürsoy; Muzaffer Bilgin; Nilgün Yıldırım
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-12-02       Impact factor: 2.031

5.  Corneal biomechanical properties measured by the ocular response analyzer in acromegalic patients.

Authors:  Emine Sen; Yasemin Tutuncu; Melike Balikoglu-Yilmaz; Ufuk Elgin; Dilek Berker; Faruk Ozturk; Serdar Guler
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-05-13       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Comparison of Goldmann applanation and dynamic contour tonometry in a population of Mexican open-angle glaucoma patients.

Authors:  J Jimenez-Roman; F Gil-Carrasco; A Martinez; O Albis-Donado; J D De la Torre-Tovar
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-11-16       Impact factor: 2.031

7.  Repeatability of the Novel Intraocular Pressure Measurement From Corvis ST.

Authors:  Masato Matsuura; Hiroshi Murata; Yuri Fujino; Mieko Yanagisawa; Yoshitaka Nakao; Shunsuke Nakakura; Yoshiaki Kiuchi; Ryo Asaoka
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2019-06-24       Impact factor: 3.283

8.  Dynamic contour tonometry in asymmetric glaucoma patients.

Authors:  Emilio Rintaro Suzuki; Cibele Lima Belico Suzuki; Danielle Carlier; Daniele Penha; Marta Dos Anjos Rodrigues Parchen; Wagner Duarte Batista; Joao Agostini Netto
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-04-11

9.  Comparison of Goldmann and Pascal tonometry in relation to corneal hysteresis and central corneal thickness in nonglaucomatous eyes.

Authors:  G Mangouritsas; S Mourtzoukos; A Mantzounis; L Alexopoulos
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-08-03

10.  Distribution of central corneal thickness and its association with ocular parameters in a large central European cohort: the Gutenberg health study.

Authors:  Esther M Hoffmann; Julia Lamparter; Alireza Mirshahi; Heike Elflein; René Hoehn; Christian Wolfram; Katrin Lorenz; Max Adler; Philipp S Wild; Andreas Schulz; Barbara Mathes; Maria Blettner; Norbert Pfeiffer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.