Literature DB >> 20577756

Comparison between Pascal dynamic contour tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometer after different types of refractive surgery.

Antonios P Aristeidou1, Georgios Labiris, Andreas Katsanos, Michalis Fanariotis, Nikitas C Foudoulakis, Vassilios P Kozobolis.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To evaluate and compare the recorded IOP values of the Pascal dynamic contour tonometer (PDCT) and the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).
METHODS: Three groups of 84, 182 and 43 patients each were treated by PRK for myopia, LASIK for myopia and LASIK for hyperopia respectively. Intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements were performed in all eyes 1 day before and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment with PDCT and GAT. Ultrasound pachymetry was performed in all eyes preoperatively and at 1st month postoperatively.
RESULTS: Preoperatively and postoperatively, GAT readings were lower than PDCT in all groups (all p < 0.05). Postoperatively in the PRK group, compared to the preoperative value, the mean differences of IOP recorded with GAT at 1st, 3rd, 6th and 12th month were -1.4 mmHg, -1.7 mmHg, -1.7 mmHg and -1.9 mmHg respectively (all p < 0.05). In the myopic LASIK group; the corresponding values with GAT were -3.6 mmHg, -3.6 mmHg, -3.6 mmHg and -3.5 mmHg (all p < 0.05), while in the hyperopic LASIK group the corresponding values were -1.1 mmHg, -0.7 mmHg, -1.1 mmHg and -0.9 mmHg (all p < 0.05). The mean IOP difference (GAT-PDCT) for myopic PRK, myopic LASIK and hyperopic LASIK were respectively -3.8 mmHg, -4.1 mmHg and -1.5 mmHg at the 12-month follow-up. No statistically significant changes were found for any group with the PDCT.
CONCLUSIONS: GAT-determined IOP values were significant lower at all time-points after hyperopic LASIK, as well as myopic PRK or LASIK. The Pascal tonometry values remained unaffected for all groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20577756     DOI: 10.1007/s00417-010-1431-9

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


  24 in total

1.  Changes in corneal biomechanics and intraocular pressure following LASIK using static, dynamic, and noncontact tonometry.

Authors:  Jay S Pepose; Susan K Feigenbaum; Mujtaba A Qazi; Jeffrey P Sanderson; Cynthia J Roberts
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-10-20       Impact factor: 5.258

2.  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

3.  Effect of corneal curvature and corneal thickness on the assessment of intraocular pressure using noncontact tonometry in patients after myopic LASIK surgery.

Authors:  Arthur C K Cheng; Dorothy Fan; Emily Tang; Dennis S C Lam
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 2.651

4.  Assessment of applanation tonometry after hyperopic laser in situ keratomileusis.

Authors:  Luis Alonso-Muñoz; Antonio Lleó-Pérez; Mohammed S Rahhal; Juan A Sanchis-Gimeno
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 2.651

5.  Underestimate of tonometric readings after photorefractive keratectomy increases at higher intraocular pressure levels.

Authors:  Ciro Tamburrelli; Andrea Giudiceandrea; Agostino Salvatore Vaiano; Carmela Grazia Caputo; Francesca Gullà; Tommaso Salgarello
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.799

6.  Intraocular pressure after LASIK for hyperopia.

Authors:  David Zadok; Frederick Raifkup; David Landao; Joseph Frucht-Pery
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 12.079

7.  Ocular rigidity evaluation after photorefractive keratectomy: an experimental study.

Authors:  George D Kymionis; Vasilios F Diakonis; George Kounis; Spyridon Charisis; Dimitrios Bouzoukis; Harilaos Ginis; Sonia Yoo; Miltiadis Tsilimbaris; Ioannis G Pallikaris
Journal:  J Refract Surg       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 3.573

8.  Dynamic contour tonometry in comparison to intracameral IOP measurements.

Authors:  Andreas G Boehm; Anja Weber; Lutz E Pillunat; Rainer Koch; Eberhard Spoerl
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2008-03-03       Impact factor: 4.799

Review 9.  Risk factors for primary open angle glaucoma progression: what we know and what we need to know.

Authors:  Jorge L Rivera; Nicholas P Bell; Robert M Feldman
Journal:  Curr Opin Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 3.761

10.  Changes in intraocular pressure after laser in situ keratomileusis.

Authors:  K M Rashad; A A Bahnassy
Journal:  J Refract Surg       Date:  2001 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.573

View more
  11 in total

1.  Influence of LASEK on Schiøtz, Goldmann and dynamic contour Tonometry.

Authors:  Marco Sales-Sanz; Esther Arranz-Marquez; Carolina Arruabarrena; Miguel A Teus
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-10-14       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Corneal hysteresis in post-radial keratotomy primary open-angle glaucoma.

Authors:  Joshua S Hardin; Christopher I Lee; Lydia F Lane; Christian C Hester; R Grant Morshedi
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  A comparison between Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry after photorefractive keratectomy.

Authors:  Afshin Lotfi Sadigh; Rohollah F Fouladi; Hassan Hashemi; Amir Houshang Beheshtnejad
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-09-02       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometry and Pascal dynamic contour tonometry in relation to central corneal thickness and corneal curvature.

Authors:  Konstantinos Andreanos; Chryssanthi Koutsandrea; Dimitris Papaconstantinou; Andreas Diagourtas; Andreas Kotoulas; Panagiotis Dimitrakas; Marilita M Moschos
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-12-09

5.  Changes in intraocular pressure values measured with noncontact tonometer (NCT), ocular response analyzer (ORA) and corvis scheimpflug technology tonometer (CST) in the early phase after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).

Authors:  Yang Shen; Xiangjian Su; Xiu Liu; Huamao Miao; Xuejun Fang; Xingtao Zhou
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 2.209

Review 6.  The Effect of Corneal Refractive Surgery on Glaucoma.

Authors:  Vassilios Kozobolis; Aristeidis Konstantinidis; Haris Sideroudi; G Labiris
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-04-09       Impact factor: 1.909

7.  Utility of Goldmann applanation tonometry for monitoring intraocular pressure in glaucoma patients with a history of laser refractive surgery.

Authors:  Sang Yeop Lee; Hyoung Won Bae; Hee Jung Kwon; Gong Je Seong; Chan Yun Kim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Intraocular pressure measurements with Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in eyes after IntraLASIK or LASEK.

Authors:  Gabi Shemesh; Uri Soiberman; Shimon Kurtz
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-11-27

9.  A retrospective analysis of the postoperative use of loteprednol etabonate gel 0.5% following laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis or photorefractive keratectomy surgery.

Authors:  Clifford L Salinger; Michael Gordon; Mitchell A Jackson; Theodore Perl; Eric Donnenfeld
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-11-06

10.  Factors Influencing Intraocular Pressure Changes after Laser In Situ Keratomileusis with Flaps Created by Femtosecond Laser or Mechanical Microkeratome.

Authors:  Meng-Yin Lin; David C K Chang; Yun-Dun Shen; Yen-Kuang Lin; Chang-Ping Lin; I-Jong Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-01-29       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.