Intraocular Pressure Values Obtained by Ocular Response Analyzer, Dynamic Contour Tonometry, and Goldmann Tonometry in Keratokonic Corneas

被引:16
|
作者
Bayer, Atilla [1 ]
Sahin, Afsun
Hurmeric, Volkan
Ozge, Gokhan
机构
[1] Gulhane Mil Med Acad, Dept Ophthalmol, Ankara, Turkey
关键词
dynamic contour tonometry; goldmann applanation tonometer; intraocular pressure; keratoconus; ocular response analyzer; APPLANATION TONOMETRY; BIOMECHANICAL PROPERTIES; THICKNESS; EYES; KERATOCONUS; PARAMETERS;
D O I
10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181ca7aeb
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Purpose: To determine the agreement between dynamic contour tonometer (DCT), Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), and Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) in keratoconic corneas and to find out the effect of corneal biomechanics on intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained by these devices. Subjects and Methods: IOP was measured with the ORA, DCT, and GAT in random order in 120 eyes of 61 keratoconus patients. Central corneal thickness (CCT) and keratometry were measured after all IOP determinations had been made. The mean IOP measurement by the ORA and DCT was compared with the measurement by the GAT, using Student t test. Bland-Altman analysis was performed to assess the clinical agreement between these methods. The effect of corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), and CCT on measured IOP was explored by multiple backward stepwise linear regression analysis. Results: The mean +/- SD patient age was 30.6 +/- 11.2 years. The mean +/- SD IOP measurement obtained with GAT, ORA Goldmann-correlated IOP (IOPg), ORA corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc), and DCT was 10.96 +/- 2.8, 10.23 +/- 3.5, 14.65 +/- 2.8, and 15.42 +/- 2.7 mm Hg, respectively. The mean +/- SD CCT was 464.08 +/- 58.4 microns. The mean difference between IOPcc and GAT (P<0.0001), IOPcc and DCT (P<0.001), GAT and DCT (P<0.0001), IOPg and GAT (P<0.002), and IOPg and DCT (P<0.0001), was highly statistically significant. In multivariable regression analysis, DCT IOP and GAT IOP measurements were significantly associated with CH and CRF (P<0.0001 for both). Conclusions: DCT seemed to be affected by CH and CRF, and the IOP values tended to be higher when compared with GAT. ORA-measured IOPcc was found to be independent of CCT and suitable in comparison to the DCT in keratoconic eyes.
引用
收藏
页码:540 / 545
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Dynamic contour tonometry versus Goldmann applanation tonometry: a comparative study
    Pache, M
    Wilmsmeyer, S
    Lautebach, S
    Funk, J
    GRAEFES ARCHIVE FOR CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2005, 243 (08) : 763 - 767
  • [42] A cross-sectional study to compare intraocular pressure measurement by sequential use of Goldman applanation tonometry, dynamic contour tonometry, ocular response analyzer, and Corvis ST
    Tejwani, Sushma
    Dinakaran, Shoruba
    Joshi, Anuja
    Shetty, Rohit
    Roy, Abhijit Sinha
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2015, 63 (11) : 815 - 820
  • [43] A Clinical Comparison of Dynamic Contour Tonometry Versus Goldmann Applanation Tonometry
    Yalcinbayir, Ozgur
    Baykara, Mehmet
    Atasoy, Aydin
    Ozcetin, Hikmet
    OPHTHALMIC SURGERY LASERS & IMAGING, 2010, 41 (04) : 437 - 442
  • [44] Goldmann Applanation Tonometry Versus Dynamic Contour Tonometry After Vitrectomy
    Mamas, Nikolaos
    Fuest, Matthias
    Koutsonas, Antonios
    Roessler, Gernot
    Mazinani, Babac E.
    Walter, Peter
    Plange, Niklas
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2016, 25 (08) : 663 - 668
  • [45] Dynamic contour tonometry versus Goldmann applanation tonometry: a comparative study
    Mona Pache
    Sonja Wilmsmeyer
    Sonja Lautebach
    Jens Funk
    Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2005, 243 : 763 - 767
  • [46] Dynamic Contour Tonometry versus Goldmann Applanation Tonometry after vitrectomy
    Mamas, Nikolaos
    Fuest, Matthias
    Roeler, Gernot
    Mazinani, Babac
    Plange, Niklas
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2013, 54 (15)
  • [47] Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry in glaucoma practice
    Halkiadakis, Ioannis
    Patsea, Eleni
    Chatzimichali, Katerina
    Skouriotis, Sotiris
    Chalkidou, Sonia
    Amariotakis, Georgios
    Papakonstadinou, Dimitrios
    Theodossiadis, George
    Amariotakis, Apostolos
    Georgopoulos, Gerasimos
    ACTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA, 2009, 87 (03) : 323 - 328
  • [48] Effect of Central Corneal Thickness and Corneal Hysteresis on Tonometry Lis Measured by Dynamic Contour Tonometry, Ocular Response Analyzer, and Goldmann Tonometry in Glaucomatous Eyes (vol 17, pg 361, 2008)
    Hager, Annette
    Loge, Kristina
    Schroeder, Bernd
    Fullhas, Mark-Oliver
    Wiegand, Wolfgang
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2008, 17 (07) : 604 - 604
  • [50] Tonographic Effect of Ocular Response Analyzer in Comparison to Goldmann Applanation Tonometry
    Zimmermann, Martin
    Pitz, Susanne
    Schmidtmann, Irene
    Pfeiffer, Norbert
    Wasielica-Poslednik, Joanna
    PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (01):