Literature DB >> 25938044

Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometry, rebound tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in normal and glaucomatous eyes.

Fatih Özcura1, Nilgün Yildirim2, Afsun Şahin2, Ertuğrul Çolak3.   

Abstract

AIM: To compare the intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained with the rebound tonometry (RT), dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) in normal and glaucomatous eyes and investigate the effects of central corneal thickness (CCT) and corneal curvature (CC) on IOP measurements.
METHODS: One hundred and twenty-four eyes of 124 subjects were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Fifty-six of participants were healthy individuals and 68 of them were glaucomatous patients. IOP was measured on each subject always in the same order, ICare RT-Pascal DCT-GAT, after a minimum interval of 10min between measurements. CCT and CC were measured using a rotating Scheimpflug camera before the IOP measurements in all subjects. One way repeated measures ANOVA, Pearson correlation coefficient and regression analysis, and Bland-Altman analysis was used for the statistical assessment.
RESULTS: Mean IOP for all enrolled eyes was 16.00±3.80 mm Hg for GAT, 16.99±4.91 mm Hg for RT, and 20.40±4.44 mm Hg for DCT. Mean differences between GAT and RT was -1.75±3.41 mm Hg in normal (P<0.001) and -0.37±3.00 mm Hg in glaucomatous eyes (P=0.563). Mean differences between GAT and DCT was -4.06±3.42 mm Hg in normal (P<0.001) and -4.67±3.12 mm Hg in glaucomatous eyes (P<0.001). GAT and RT were significantly positive correlated with CCT in normal (r=0.317, P=0.017 and r=0.576, P<0.001, respectively) and glaucomatous eyes (r=0.290, P=0.016 and r=0.351, P=0.003, respectively). DCT was also significantly positive correlated with CCT in normal eyes (r=0.424, P=0.001) but not in glaucomatous eyes (r=0.170, P=0.165). All tonometers were unaffected by CC.
CONCLUSION: IOP measurements by RT and DCT were significantly higher than GAT. DCT has highest IOP measurements among these tonometers. RT was most influenced tonometer from CCT although all tonometers were significantly positive correlated with CCT except DCT in glaucomatous eyes. CC did not influence IOP measurements.

Entities:  

Keywords:  central corneal thickness; corneal curvature; glaucoma; tonometry

Year:  2015        PMID: 25938044      PMCID: PMC4413589          DOI: 10.3980/j.issn.2222-3959.2015.02.15

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 2222-3959            Impact factor:   1.779


  30 in total

1.  Performance of the rebound, noncontact and Goldmann applanation tonometers in routine clinical practice.

Authors:  Jose M Martinez-de-la-Casa; Maria Jimenez-Santos; Federico Saenz-Frances; Maria Matilla-Rodero; Carmen Mendez-Hernandez; Rocio Herrero-Vanrell; Julian Garcia-Feijoo
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-11-09       Impact factor: 3.761

2.  Central corneal thickness, radius of the corneal curvature and intraocular pressure in normal subjects using non-contact techniques: Reykjavik Eye Study.

Authors:  Thor Eysteinsson; Fridbert Jonasson; Hiroshi Sasaki; Arsaell Arnarsson; Thordur Sverrisson; Kazuyuki Sasaki; Einar Stefánsson
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol Scand       Date:  2002-02

3.  Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements and assessment of intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility with the portable ICare rebound tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients.

Authors:  Sarwat Salim; Haiming Du; Jim Wan
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2013 Apr-May       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Influence of keratometric readings on comparative intraocular pressure measurements with Goldmann, Tono-Pen, and noncontact tonometers.

Authors:  A Paranhos; F R Paranhos; J A Prata; C A Omi; P A Mello; M B Shields
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.503

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

Review 6.  Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers.

Authors:  M M Whitacre; R Stein
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  1993 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 6.048

7.  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.

Authors:  Chungkwon Yoo; Young Sub Eom; Yong Yeon Kim
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-07-22       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  The influence of corneal properties on rebound tonometry.

Authors:  Wan-sang Chui; Andrew Lam; Davie Chen; Roger Chiu
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2007-06-15       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Relationship of central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure by iCare rebound tonometer.

Authors:  Aparna Rao; Mukesh Kumar; B Prakash; Gopal Varshney
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 2.503

10.  The effect of prostaglandin analogs on the biomechanical properties and central thickness of the cornea of patients with open-angle glaucoma: a 3-year study on 108 eyes.

Authors:  Panagiotis Tsikripis; Dimitrios Papaconstantinou; Chryssanthi Koutsandrea; Michalis Apostolopoulos; Ilias Georgalas
Journal:  Drug Des Devel Ther       Date:  2013-10-04       Impact factor: 4.162

View more
  10 in total

1.  Impact of corneal parameters on intraocular pressure measurements in different tonometry methods.

Authors:  Aleksandra Zakrzewska; Marta P Wiącek; Anna Machalińska
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 1.779

2.  Does patient comfort influence the choice of tonometer for the measurement of intraocular pressure?

Authors:  Mary O Ugalahi; Mukaila A Seidu; Bolutife A Olusanya; Aderonke M Baiyeroju
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-10-16       Impact factor: 2.031

3.  Dependence of dynamic contour and Goldmann applanation tonometries on peripheral corneal thickness.

Authors:  Federico Saenz-Frances; Claudia Sanz-Pozo; Lara Borrego-Sanz; Luis Jañez; Laura Morales-Fernandez; Jose Maria Martinez-de-la-Casa; Julian Garcia-Sanchez; Julian Garcia-Feijoo; Enrique Santos-Bueso
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-10-18       Impact factor: 1.779

4.  Ocular pulse amplitude and visual field changes in patients diagnosed with aortic regurgitation.

Authors:  Sinan Bekmez; Harun Cakmak; Cagdas Akgullu; Tolga Kocaturk; Erdem Eris; Ufuk Eryilmaz
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-09-04       Impact factor: 2.029

5.  Corneal-compensated intraocular pressure, Goldmann-correlated intraocular pressure and their associated factors in the geriatric population, a population-based study.

Authors:  Fereshteh Shokrollahzadeh; Hassan Hashemi; Abbasali Yekta; Hadi Ostadimoghaddam; Ebrahim Jafarzadehpour; Mehdi Khabazkhoob
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-01-03       Impact factor: 2.029

6.  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

7.  Reply to comment by De Bernardo and Rosa on "Evaluation of Goldmann applanation tonometry, rebound tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in keratoconus".

Authors:  Fatih Özcura; Nilgün Yıldırım
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2017-12-15

8.  Is Palpation Sufficient for Estimation of IOP Immediately Following Cataract Surgery?

Authors:  Andrew J Polk; Van Nguyen; John Jarstad
Journal:  Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-03-30

9.  Audit of outcomes following attendance at the City West drive-through IOP glaucoma clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Sarah Powell; Emer Doolan; Karen Curtin; Aoife Doyle; Colm O'Brien
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2022-01-16       Impact factor: 2.089

Review 10.  Blood Pressure Sensors: Materials, Fabrication Methods, Performance Evaluations and Future Perspectives.

Authors:  Ahmed Al-Qatatsheh; Yosry Morsi; Ali Zavabeti; Ali Zolfagharian; Nisa Salim; Abbas Z Kouzani; Bobak Mosadegh; Saleh Gharaie
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-08-11       Impact factor: 3.576

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.