Literature DB >> 31850168

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

Aleksandra Zakrzewska1, Marta P Wiącek1, Anna Machalińska1.   

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the impact of central corneal thickness (CCT) and corneal curvature on intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements performed by three different tonometers.
METHODS: IOP in 132 healthy eyes of 66 participants was measured using three different tonometry techniques: Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), Pascal dynamic contour tonometer (DCT), and ICare rebound tonometer (RT). CCT and corneal curvature were assessed.
RESULTS: In healthy eyes, DCT presents significantly higher values of IOP than GAT (17.34±3.69 and 15.27±4.06 mm Hg, P<0.0001). RT measurements are significantly lower than GAT (13.56±4.33 mm Hg, P<0.0001). Compared with GAT, DCT presented on average 2.51 mm Hg higher values in eyes with CCT<600 µm and 0.99 mm Hg higher results in eyes with CCT≥600 µm. The RT results were lower on average by 1.61 and 1.95 mm Hg than those obtained by GAT, respectively. Positive correlations between CCT in eyes with CCT<600 µm were detected for all IOP measurement techniques, whereas a similar relationship was not observed in eyes with thicker corneas. A correlation between IOP values and keratometry in the group with CCT<600 µm was not detected with any of the tonometry methods. In thicker corneas, a positive correlation was found for GAT and mean keratometry values (R=0.369, P=0.005).
CONCLUSION: The same method should always be chosen for routine IOP control, and measurements obtained by different methods cannot be compared. All analysed tonometry methods are dependent on CCT; thus, CCT should be taken into consideration for both diagnostics and monitoring. International Journal of Ophthalmology Press.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Goldmann applanation tonometer; ICare rebound tonometer; Pascal dynamic contour tonometer; central corneal thickness; corneal curvature; healthy individuals; intraocular pressure

Year:  2019        PMID: 31850168      PMCID: PMC6901878          DOI: 10.18240/ijo.2019.12.06

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


  25 in total

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

Authors:  Fatih Özcura; Nilgün Yildirim; Afsun Şahin; Ertuğrul Çolak
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-04-18       Impact factor: 1.779

2.  IOP measured by dynamic contour tonometry correlates with IOP measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry and non-contact tonometry in Japanese individuals.

Authors:  Ken Ito; Akihiko Tawara; Toshiaki Kubota; Yukinori Harada
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Evaluation of the influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurements using the ocular response analyzer.

Authors:  Felipe A Medeiros; Robert N Weinreb
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Comparison of iCare tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometry in normal corneas and in eyes with automated lamellar and penetrating keratoplasty.

Authors:  M L Salvetat; M Zeppieri; F Miani; C Tosoni; L Parisi; P Brusini
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2011-03-25       Impact factor: 3.775

5.  Rebound, applanation, and dynamic contour tonometry in pathologic corneas.

Authors:  André Rosentreter; Apostolos Athanasopoulos; Andrea M Schild; Alexandra Lappas; Claus Cursiefen; Thomas S Dietlein
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 2.651

6.  Intraocular pressure, Goldmann applanation tension, corneal thickness, and corneal curvature in Caucasians, Asians, Hispanics, and African Americans.

Authors:  Mitsugu Shimmyo; Anna J Ross; Anna Moy; Ramin Mostafavi
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 5.258

7.  Effects of corneal thickness, corneal curvature, and intraocular pressure level on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry.

Authors:  Brian A Francis; Amy Hsieh; Mei-Ying Lai; Vikas Chopra; Fernando Pena; Stanley Azen; Rohit Varma
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2006-10-27       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  Corneal astigmatism in applanation tonometry.

Authors:  H H Mark; T L Mark
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 3.775

Review 9.  New ways to measure intraocular pressure.

Authors:  Mohammed K ElMallah; Sanjay G Asrani
Journal:  Curr Opin Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 3.761

10.  Goldmann tonometer error correcting prism: clinical evaluation.

Authors:  Sean McCafferty; Garrett Lim; William Duncan; Eniko T Enikov; Jim Schwiegerling; Jason Levine; Corin Kew
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-05-03
View more
  2 in total

1.  Intraocular Pressure and Its Relation to Ocular Geometry: Results From the Gutenberg Health Study.

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

2.  Influence of Corneal Visualization Scheimpflug Technology Tonometry on Intraocular Pressure.

Authors:  Davide Borroni; Kunal Ajit Gadhvi; Rozaliya Hristova; Keri McLean; Carlos Rocha de Lossada; Vito Romano; Stephen Kaye
Journal:  Ophthalmol Sci       Date:  2021-01-13
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.