PURPOSE: To describe intraocular pressure (IOP) and central corneal thickness (CCT) in ethnically diverse, myopic young adults enrolled in COMET (the Correction of Myopia Evaluation Trial) and their association with ocular and demographic factors. METHODS: IOP (Goldmann tonometry), CCT (handheld pachymetry), refractive error (cycloplegic autorefraction), and ocular components (A-scan ultrasonography) were measured in 385 of the original 469 subjects (mean age = 20.3 ± 1.3 years). Summary statistics for descriptive analysis, Pearson correlation coefficients, and linear regression models to formally test the association of IOP and CCT with other covariates were used. RESULTS: Mean IOP was 15.1 ± 0.1 mm Hg and differed by ethnicity and CCT but did not vary by gender, magnitude of myopia, or vitreous chamber depth (VCD). Adjusting for CCT, IOP in black participants was 1.8 mm Hg higher than in Hispanics (p = 0.0001) and 0.8 mm Hg higher than in whites (p = 0.03). Mean CCT was 562.4 ± 1.8 μm and differed by ethnicity, VCD, and IOP after adjusting for covariates. Blacks had thinner corneas than Asians, whites, and Hispanics, with adjusted differences of 15.4, 11.8, and 15.3 μm (p = 0.03, < 0.01 and < 0.01), respectively. Eyes with shorter VCD (<17.8 mm) had 8.0-μm thinner CCT (p = 0.03). CCT did not vary by gender or magnitude of myopia. Overall, a modest positive correlation (r = 0.25, P < 0.0001) was found between IOP and CCT, which varied by ethnicity in Asians (r = 0.47; p = 0.008), blacks (r = 0.29; p = 0.002), and whites (r = 0.24; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Myopic, black young adults had higher IOP and thinner corneas relative to other ethnic groups, suggesting that evaluation of these parameters during routine examination of these individuals should begin at a young age. Their thinner CCT should also be considered in evaluations for refractive surgery.
PURPOSE: To describe intraocular pressure (IOP) and central corneal thickness (CCT) in ethnically diverse, myopic young adults enrolled in COMET (the Correction of Myopia Evaluation Trial) and their association with ocular and demographic factors. METHODS: IOP (Goldmann tonometry), CCT (handheld pachymetry), refractive error (cycloplegic autorefraction), and ocular components (A-scan ultrasonography) were measured in 385 of the original 469 subjects (mean age = 20.3 ± 1.3 years). Summary statistics for descriptive analysis, Pearson correlation coefficients, and linear regression models to formally test the association of IOP and CCT with other covariates were used. RESULTS: Mean IOP was 15.1 ± 0.1 mm Hg and differed by ethnicity and CCT but did not vary by gender, magnitude of myopia, or vitreous chamber depth (VCD). Adjusting for CCT, IOP in black participants was 1.8 mm Hg higher than in Hispanics (p = 0.0001) and 0.8 mm Hg higher than in whites (p = 0.03). Mean CCT was 562.4 ± 1.8 μm and differed by ethnicity, VCD, and IOP after adjusting for covariates. Blacks had thinner corneas than Asians, whites, and Hispanics, with adjusted differences of 15.4, 11.8, and 15.3 μm (p = 0.03, < 0.01 and < 0.01), respectively. Eyes with shorter VCD (<17.8 mm) had 8.0-μm thinner CCT (p = 0.03). CCT did not vary by gender or magnitude of myopia. Overall, a modest positive correlation (r = 0.25, P < 0.0001) was found between IOP and CCT, which varied by ethnicity in Asians (r = 0.47; p = 0.008), blacks (r = 0.29; p = 0.002), and whites (r = 0.24; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Myopic, black young adults had higher IOP and thinner corneas relative to other ethnic groups, suggesting that evaluation of these parameters during routine examination of these individuals should begin at a young age. Their thinner CCT should also be considered in evaluations for refractive surgery.
Authors: Ruth E Manny; G Lynn Mitchell; Susan A Cotter; Lisa A Jones-Jordan; Robert N Kleinstein; Donald O Mutti; J Daniel Twelker; Karla Zadnik Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: Michael W Marcus; Margriet M de Vries; Francisco G Junoy Montolio; Nomdo M Jansonius Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Jane Gwiazda; Wendy L Marsh-Tootle; Leslie Hyman; Mohamed Hussein; Thomas T Norton Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Mae O Gordon; Julia A Beiser; James D Brandt; Dale K Heuer; Eve J Higginbotham; Chris A Johnson; John L Keltner; J Philip Miller; Richard K Parrish; M Roy Wilson; Michael A Kass Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2002-06
Authors: Ruth E Manny; Li Deng; Jane Gwiazda; Leslie Hyman; Erik Weissberg; Mitchell Scheiman; Karen D Fern Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: Jeffrey J Walline; Kristina B Lindsley; S Swaroop Vedula; Susan A Cotter; Donald O Mutti; Sueko M Ng; J Daniel Twelker Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2020-01-13
Authors: Hélène Choquet; Ronald B Melles; Jie Yin; Thomas J Hoffmann; Khanh K Thai; Mark N Kvale; Yambazi Banda; Alison J Hardcastle; Stephen J Tuft; M Maria Glymour; Catherine Schaefer; Neil Risch; K Saidas Nair; Pirro G Hysi; Eric Jorgenson Journal: Commun Biol Date: 2020-06-11
Authors: Esther M Hoffmann; Fidan Aghayeva; Felix M Wagner; Achim Fiess; Markus Nagler; Thomas Münzel; Philipp S Wild; Manfred E Beutel; Irene Schmidtmann; Karl J Lackner; Norbert Pfeiffer; Alexander K Schuster Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2022-01-03 Impact factor: 4.799