PURPOSE: To analyse the relationship between measured intraocular pressure (IOP) and central corneal thickness (CCT), corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) in ocular hypertension (OHT), primary open-angle (POAG) and normal tension glaucoma (NTG) eyes using multiple tonometry devices. METHODS: Right eyes of patients diagnosed with OHT (n=47), normal tension glaucoma (n=17) and POAG (n=50) were assessed. IOP was measured in random order with four devices: Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT); Pascal dynamic contour tonometer (DCT); Reichert ocular response analyser (ORA); and Tono-Pen XL. CCT was then measured using a hand-held ultrasonic pachymeter. CH and CRF were derived from the air pressure to corneal reflectance relationship of the ORA data. RESULTS: Compared to the GAT, the Tonopen and ORA Goldmann equivalent (IOPg) and corneal compensated (IOPcc) measured higher IOP readings (F=19.351, p<0.001), particularly in NTG (F=12.604, p<0.001). DCT was closest to Goldmann IOP and had the lowest variance. CCT was significantly different (F=8.305, p<0.001) between the 3 conditions as was CH (F=6.854, p=0.002) and CRF (F=19.653, p<0.001). IOPcc measures were not affected by CCT. The DCT was generally not affected by corneal biomechanical factors. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that as the true pressure of the eye cannot be determined non-invasively, measurements from any tonometer should be interpreted with care, particularly when alterations in the corneal tissue are suspected.
PURPOSE: To analyse the relationship between measured intraocular pressure (IOP) and central corneal thickness (CCT), corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) in ocular hypertension (OHT), primary open-angle (POAG) and normal tension glaucoma (NTG) eyes using multiple tonometry devices. METHODS: Right eyes of patients diagnosed with OHT (n=47), normal tension glaucoma (n=17) and POAG (n=50) were assessed. IOP was measured in random order with four devices: Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT); Pascal dynamic contour tonometer (DCT); Reichert ocular response analyser (ORA); and Tono-Pen XL. CCT was then measured using a hand-held ultrasonic pachymeter. CH and CRF were derived from the air pressure to corneal reflectance relationship of the ORA data. RESULTS: Compared to the GAT, the Tonopen and ORA Goldmann equivalent (IOPg) and corneal compensated (IOPcc) measured higher IOP readings (F=19.351, p<0.001), particularly in NTG (F=12.604, p<0.001). DCT was closest to Goldmann IOP and had the lowest variance. CCT was significantly different (F=8.305, p<0.001) between the 3 conditions as was CH (F=6.854, p=0.002) and CRF (F=19.653, p<0.001). IOPcc measures were not affected by CCT. The DCT was generally not affected by corneal biomechanical factors. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that as the true pressure of the eye cannot be determined non-invasively, measurements from any tonometer should be interpreted with care, particularly when alterations in the corneal tissue are suspected.
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