Literature DB >> 20652303

Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in eyes with elevated intraocular pressure (IOP): comparison in the same eyes after subsequent medical normalization of IOP.

Chungkwon Yoo1, Young Sub Eom, Yong Yeon Kim.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although it is widely accepted that the Pascal dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) reading is higher than Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) in normal range of intraocular pressure (IOP), it remains unclear whether DCT reading is higher or lower than GAT in an eye with severely elevated IOP. This study aimed to compare the IOP measurements obtained using GAT with DCT in eyes with elevated IOP and to compare the GAT and DCT measurements in the same eyes after subsequent normalization of the IOP with medical therapy.
METHODS: Eyes with IOP greater than 30 mmHg as measured by GAT at the initial examination were enrolled for a prospective study. IOP was measured by GAT and DCT. Central corneal thickness (CCT) was measured using a specular microscope. When the GAT-IOP was reduced to below 21 mmHg with medical therapy, DCT and CCT measurements were taken in the same eyes.
RESULTS: Measurements from 27 patients were suitable for statistical analysis. At baseline examination, the mean DCT was significantly lower than their mean GAT (30.0 ± 5.8 mmHg vs 38.7 ± 9.1 mmHg, P < 0.001). After the IOP-lowering medical therapy had been instituted, the mean DCT was significantly higher than the mean GAT (17.9 ± 3.1 mmHg vs 15.6 ± 2.7 mmHg, P < 0.001). The mean post-treatment IOP reduction was 12.1 mmHg (40.3%) by DCT and 23.1 mmHg (59.7%) by GAT. The mean CCT showed no significant difference after the IOP-lowering therapy (537.7 ± 31.4 μm vs 543.1 ± 47.7 μm, P = 0.596). The mean ocular pulse amplitude decreased significantly after the medical treatment (3.16 ± 1.24 mmHg vs 2.07 ± 0.93 mmHg, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: DCT-IOP, which is higher than GAT-IOP in normotensive eyes, is lower in eyes with GAT-IOP exceeding 30 mmHg.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20652303     DOI: 10.1007/s00417-010-1462-2

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


  37 in total

1.  Ocular pulse amplitude in healthy subjects as measured by dynamic contour tonometry.

Authors:  Claude Kaufmann; Lucas M Bachmann; Yves C Robert; Michael A Thiel
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-08

2.  Comparisons between Pascal dynamic contour tonometry, the TonoPen, and Goldmann applanation tonometry in patients with glaucoma.

Authors:  Maria L Salvetat; Marco Zeppieri; Claudia Tosoni; Paolo Brusini
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol Scand       Date:  2007-05

3.  The relative effects of corneal thickness and age on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry.

Authors:  A Kotecha; E T White; J M Shewry; D F Garway-Heath
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  Standardizing the measurement of intraocular pressure for clinical research. Guidelines from the Eye Care Technology Forum.

Authors:  M A Kass
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 12.079

Review 5.  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

6.  Central and peripheral corneal thickness measured with the TOPCON specular microscope SP-2000P.

Authors:  P Cho; S W Cheung
Journal:  Curr Eye Res       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.424

7.  Effects of corneal thickness, corneal curvature, and intraocular pressure level on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry.

Authors:  Brian A Francis; Amy Hsieh; Mei-Ying Lai; Vikas Chopra; Fernando Pena; Stanley Azen; Rohit Varma
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2006-10-27       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  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

9.  The effect of contact lens-induced corneal edema on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry.

Authors:  Jong-Hyun Oh; Chungkwon Yoo; Yong Yeon Kim; Hyo-Myung Kim; Jong-Suk Song
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-10-09       Impact factor: 3.117

10.  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

View more
  3 in total

1.  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

2.  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

3.  Evaluation of Goldmann applanation tonometry, rebound tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in keratoconus.

Authors:  Fatih Özcura; Nilgün Yıldırım; Emre Tambova; Afsun Şahin
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2016-07-09
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.