Literature DB >> 32478941

Validation and comparison of four handheld tonometers in normal ex vivo canine eyes.

Andrea L Minella1, Julie A Kiland2, Shawna Gloe2, Gillian J McLellan1,2,3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the accuracy and precision of the Icare® TONOVET Plus rebound tonometer and the Tono-Pen AVIA Vet™ applanation tonometer for intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement in normal ex vivo canine eyes and comparison to earlier models of these tonometers. ANIMALS & PROCEDURES: The anterior chambers of six normal dog eyes were cannulated ex vivo. IOP was measured with the TONOVET (TV01), TONOVET Plus, Tono-Pen Vet™, and Tono-Pen AVIA Vet™ at manometric IOPs ranging from 5 to 70 mm Hg. Data were analyzed by linear regression, ANOVA and Bland-Altman plots. A P value ≤ .05 was considered significant.
RESULTS: Intraocular pressure values obtained using the TONOVET Plus and TV01 were significantly more accurate than with the Tono-Pen VET and Tono-Pen AVIA Vet, particularly at higher IOPs (30-70 mm Hg). Accuracy was not significantly different between any of the devices in the low to normal physiologic IOP range (5-25 mm Hg). Level of precision was high for all devices, though the TONOVET Plus was more precise than the Tono-Pen Vet in the 5-25 mmHg range and the TV01 was more precise than the Tono-Pen AVIA Vet over the whole IOP range.
CONCLUSIONS: All devices underestimated IOP, particularly at higher pressures. Rebound tonometers were more accurate over the full range of IOP tested and in the high IOP range; however, there were no significant differences in accuracy among devices in the physiologic IOP range. All tonometers can provide clinically useful IOP readings in dogs, but rebound and applanation tonometers should not be used interchangeably.
© 2020 American College of Veterinary Ophthalmologists.

Entities:  

Keywords:  applanation tonometer; dog; intraocular pressure; manometry; rebound tonometer

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32478941      PMCID: PMC8321415          DOI: 10.1111/vop.12780

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vet Ophthalmol        ISSN: 1463-5216            Impact factor:   1.644


  31 in total

1.  Accuracy and reproducibility of the TonoVet rebound tonometer in birds of prey.

Authors:  Anne Reuter; Kerstin Müller; Gisela Arndt; Johanna Corinna Eule
Journal:  Vet Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.644

2.  Intraocular pressure measurement in mice: a comparison between Goldmann and rebound tonometry.

Authors:  C Y Kim; M H Kuehn; M G Anderson; Y H Kwon
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2006-09-01       Impact factor: 3.775

3.  Comparison of simultaneous readings of intraocular pressure in rabbits using Perkins handheld, Tono-Pen XL, and TonoVet tonometers.

Authors:  Giedrius Kalesnykas; Hannu Uusitalo
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-11-21       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 4.  Assessment of true intraocular pressure: the gap between theory and practical data.

Authors:  Etsuo Chihara
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  2008 May-Jun       Impact factor: 6.048

5.  Evaluation of two applanation tonometers in horses.

Authors:  P E Miller; J P Pickett; L J Majors
Journal:  Am J Vet Res       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 1.156

6.  Comparison of central corneal thickness in dogs measured by ultrasound pachymetry and ultrasound biomicroscopy.

Authors:  Eva Martín-Suárez; Alba Galán; Juan Morgaz; Alicia Guisado; José María Gallardo; Rafael Jesús Gómez-Villamandos
Journal:  Vet J       Date:  2017-12-05       Impact factor: 2.688

7.  Comparison of rebound tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry and correlation with central corneal thickness.

Authors:  M E Iliev; D Goldblum; K Katsoulis; C Amstutz; B Frueh
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-05-03       Impact factor: 4.638

8.  Tonometer validation and intraocular pressure reference values in the normal chinchilla (Chinchilla lanigera).

Authors:  Kevin C Snyder; Andrew C Lewin; Christoph Mans; Gillian J McLellan
Journal:  Vet Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-03-17       Impact factor: 1.644

9.  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

10.  Evaluation of monkey intraocular pressure by rebound tonometer.

Authors:  Wenhan Yu; Guiqun Cao; Jinghua Qiu; Xuyang Liu; Jia Ma; Ni Li; Man Yu; Naihong Yan; Lei Chen; Iok-Hou Pang
Journal:  Mol Vis       Date:  2009-10-27       Impact factor: 2.367

View more
  1 in total

1.  Comparison among TonoVet, TonoVet Plus, Tono-Pen Avia Vet, and Kowa HA-2 portable tonometers for measuring intraocular pressure in dogs.

Authors:  João Victor Goulart Consoni Passareli; Felipe Franco Nascimento; Giovana José Garcia Estanho; Claudia Lizandra Ricci; Glaucia Prada Kanashiro; Rogério Giuffrida; Silvia Franco Andrade
Journal:  Vet World       Date:  2021-09-21
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.