PURPOSE: We used a prototype gas esthesiometer to measure corneal threshold sensitivity values for mechanical, chemical, and thermal stimuli. We also evaluated the reproducibility of the esthesiometer measurements, the influence of previous corneal symptoms, and the safety of this technique. METHODS: Forty healthy subjects participated in the study. Mechanical, chemical, and thermal (hot and cold) thresholds were determined at the center of the cornea using a prototype Belmonte's gas esthesiometer. To determine reproducibility of the results, the sensitivity thresholds were measured for each eye on 2 days. Corneal fluorescein staining and bulbar hyperemia after completion of the tests were analyzed. RESULTS: There were no differences for any sensitivity threshold between eyes or between the first and second esthesiometries. The reproducibilities of mechanical and hot thresholds were higher than for chemical and cold thresholds. Men had significantly higher chemical intensity thresholds than did women (men: 23.50 ± 5.10; women: 10.20 ± 2.16, P = 0.021). There were no alterations of the ocular surface after completion of the measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical, chemical, and thermal corneal sensitivity thresholds in the central cornea have been established in healthy men and women of different age groups. The use of the Belmonte gas esthesiometer is safe and reproducible, with the highest reproducibility in determining mechanical and hot thresholds.
PURPOSE: We used a prototype gas esthesiometer to measure corneal threshold sensitivity values for mechanical, chemical, and thermal stimuli. We also evaluated the reproducibility of the esthesiometer measurements, the influence of previous corneal symptoms, and the safety of this technique. METHODS: Forty healthy subjects participated in the study. Mechanical, chemical, and thermal (hot and cold) thresholds were determined at the center of the cornea using a prototype Belmonte's gas esthesiometer. To determine reproducibility of the results, the sensitivity thresholds were measured for each eye on 2 days. Corneal fluorescein staining and bulbar hyperemia after completion of the tests were analyzed. RESULTS: There were no differences for any sensitivity threshold between eyes or between the first and second esthesiometries. The reproducibilities of mechanical and hot thresholds were higher than for chemical and cold thresholds. Men had significantly higher chemical intensity thresholds than did women (men: 23.50 ± 5.10; women: 10.20 ± 2.16, P = 0.021). There were no alterations of the ocular surface after completion of the measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical, chemical, and thermal corneal sensitivity thresholds in the central cornea have been established in healthy men and women of different age groups. The use of the Belmonte gas esthesiometer is safe and reproducible, with the highest reproducibility in determining mechanical and hot thresholds.
Authors: Fiona Stapleton; Carl Marfurt; Blanka Golebiowski; Mark Rosenblatt; David Bereiter; Carolyn Begley; Darlene Dartt; Juana Gallar; Carlos Belmonte; Pedram Hamrah; Mark Willcox Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2013-10-18 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Luis F Giraldo-Cadavid; Javier Burguete; Felipe Rueda; Ana M Galvis; Natalia Castaneda; Luis M Agudelo-Otalora; William D Moscoso; Nelson Paez; Secundino Fernandez Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2017-03-24 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Manuel Ángel Marcos-Fernández; Sara Sánchez Tabernero; Jose María Herreras; David José Galarreta Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2017-10-29 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Effie Z Rahman; Peter K Lam; Chia-Kai Chu; Quianta Moore; Stephen C Pflugfelder Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2015-08-06 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Luis F Giraldo-Cadavid; Luis Mauricio Agudelo-Otalora; Javier Burguete; Mario Arbulu; William Daniel Moscoso; Fabio Martínez; Andrés Felipe Ortiz; Juan Diaz; Jaime A Pantoja; Andrés Felipe Rueda-Arango; Secundino Fernández Journal: Biomed Eng Online Date: 2016-05-10 Impact factor: 2.819
Authors: Lóránt Dienes; Huba J Kiss; Kristóf Perényi; Zsuzsanna Szepessy; Zoltán Z Nagy; Árpád Barsi; M Carmen Acosta; Juana Gallar; Illés Kovács Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-08-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Oriel Spierer; Elizabeth R Felix; Allison L McClellan; Jean Marie Parel; Alex Gonzalez; William J Feuer; Constantine D Sarantopoulos; Roy C Levitt; Klaus Ehrmann; Anat Galor Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 4.799