Literature DB >> 26481062

Intraocular pressure evaluation in healthy eyes and diseased ones using contact and non contact devices.

Michele Lanza1, Stefania Iaccarino2, Luigi Mele3, Ugo Antonello Gironi Carnevale3, Carlo Irregolare2, Alessandro Lanza3, Felice Femiano3, Mario Bifani3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To analyze and compare intraocular pressure (IOP) values measured in healthy subjects (HS), keratoconus (KC) patients and patients that underwent myopic photorefractive keratectomy (REF), using Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), ocular response analyzer (ORA) and Corvis ST (CST).
METHODS: The study included 76 eyes of 76HS, 15 eyes of 15 KC patients and 18 eyes of 18 subjects that underwent REF. Each participant underwent a complete ophthalmic evaluation, IOP measurement with GAT, DCT, ORA and CST.
RESULTS: HS showed a mean GAT value of 15.62±2.33 mm Hg, a mean DCT value of 17.44±2.51 mm Hg, a mean ORA value of 15.99±3.58 mm Hg and a mean CST value of 17.24±3.44 mm Hg. KC showed a mean GAT value of 15.07±1.83 mm Hg, a mean DCT value of 17.01±1.96 mm Hg, a mean ORA value of 13.58±2.99 mm Hg and a mean CST value of 14.37±1.89 mm Hg. REF showed a mean GAT value of 14.06±1.51 mm Hg, a mean DCT value of 15.12±2.34 mm Hg, a mean ORA value of 16.85±2.4 mm Hg and a mean CST value of 15.57±1.77 mm Hg.
CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that ORA and GAT could be used interchangeably in HS; GAT, ORA and CST could be used interchangeably in KC patients and that GAT provides lower IOP values compared to the other devices in eyes previously submitted to myopic PRK.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Corvis ST; Dynamic contour tonometry; Goldmann tonometry; ORA; intraocular pressure

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26481062     DOI: 10.1016/j.clae.2015.10.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cont Lens Anterior Eye        ISSN: 1367-0484            Impact factor:   3.077


  6 in total

1.  Comparative analysis of biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure with corneal visualization Scheimpflug technology versus conventional noncontact intraocular pressure.

Authors:  Jiaonan Ma; Yan Wang; Weiting Hao; Vishal Jhanji
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-08-20       Impact factor: 2.031

2.  Comparison among Ocular Response Analyzer, Corvis ST and Goldmann applanation tonometry in healthy children.

Authors:  Ramin Salouti; Ali Agha Alishiri; Reza Gharebaghi; Mostafa Naderi; Khosrow Jadidi; Ahmad Shojaei-Baghini; Mohammadreza Talebnejad; Zahra Nasiri; Seyedmorteza Hosseini; Fatemeh Heidary
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-08-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  A Contralateral Eye Study Comparing Corneal Biomechanics in Subjects with Bilateral Keratoconus with Unilateral Vogt's Striae.

Authors:  Farshad Askarizadeh; Mohamad-Reza Sedaghat; Hadi Ostadi-Moghaddam; Foroozan Narooie-Noori; Tahereh Rakhshandadi; Sattar Rajabi
Journal:  Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol       Date:  2017

4.  Therapeutic potential of AAV-mediated MMP-3 secretion from corneal endothelium in treating glaucoma.

Authors:  Jeffrey O'Callaghan; Darragh E Crosbie; Paul S Cassidy; Joseph M Sherwood; Cassandra Flügel-Koch; Elke Lütjen-Drecoll; Marian M Humphries; Ester Reina-Torres; Deborah Wallace; Anna-Sophia Kiang; Matthew Campbell; W Daniel Stamer; Darryl R Overby; Colm O'Brien; Lawrence C S Tam; Peter Humphries
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 6.150

5.  Estimation of the Corneal Young's Modulus In Vivo Based on a Fluid-Filled Spherical-Shell Model with Scheimpflug Imaging.

Authors:  Po-Jen Shih; Chun-Ju Huang; Tzu-Han Huang; Hung-Chou Lin; Jia-Yush Yen; I-Jong Wang; Hui-Jyun Cao; Wen-Pin Shih; Chi-An Dai
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-11-08       Impact factor: 1.909

6.  Analysis of differences in intraocular pressure evaluation performed with contact and non-contact devices.

Authors:  Michele Lanza; Michele Rinaldi; Ugo Antonello Gironi Carnevale; Silvio di Staso; Mario Bifani Sconocchia; Ciro Costagliola
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-09-03       Impact factor: 2.209

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.