Dynamic Contour Tonometry and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry: Difference of Intraocular Pressure Values Between Eyes with and without Glaucomatous Damage in Thin Corneas

被引:1
|
作者
Akkan, J. C. Umurhan [1 ]
Akkan, F. [2 ]
Akcay, B. I. Sezgin [3 ]
Ayintap, E. [1 ]
Tuncer, K. [1 ]
机构
[1] Bezmialem Vakif Univ, Fak Med, Augenklin, TR-34093 Istanbul, Turkey
[2] Lehr & Forsch Krankenhaus, Augenklin Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey
[3] Lehr & Forsch Krankenhaus, Augenklin Umraniye, Istanbul, Turkey
关键词
intraocular pressure; Goldmann tonometry; dynamic contour tonometry; glaucoma; OPEN-ANGLE GLAUCOMA; THICKNESS; HEALTHY; AGE;
D O I
10.1055/s-0041-104772
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Background: To examine the differences in intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and Pascal dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) in subjects with thin corneas and to correlate these with structural and functional parameters of glaucoma damage. Patients and Methods: One hundred and thirty participants (130 eyes) with central corneal thickness lower than 500 mu m were included in five groups in this cross-sectional observational study: 52 eyes with primary open angle glaucoma (POAG), 19 eyes with normal tension glaucoma (NTG), 27 eyes with ocular hypertension (OHT), 21 participants suspected of having glaucoma (GS), and 11 healthy subjects. The measurements were obtained with GAT and DCT in a masked fashion. The corrected GAT-IOP for central corneal thickness (CCT), the difference between DCT and GAT (Delta IOP = DCT-GAT) and corrected Delta IOP (corrected Delta IOP = DCT-corrected GAT) were calculated. Age, mean deviation (MD) from the most recent reliable visual field examination, average retinal nerve fibre layer thickness (RNFL), cup-to-disc ratio (CDR), ocular pulse amplitude (OPA), and treatment status were recorded for statistical analysis. Results: In all of the subjects (n = 130), the mean DCT, GAT and corrected GAT values were 17.6 +/- 3.4 mmHg, 13.2 +/- 3.8 mmHg, and 15.5 +/- 2.1 mmHg, respectively. Delta IOP and corrected Delta IOP were 4.4 +/- 2 mmHg and 1.7 +/- 2 mmHg, respectively. Delta IOP was correlated negatively with MD (rs = -0.32, p < 0.0001) and average RNFL thickness (r = -0.46, p < 0.0001) and positively with CDR (rs = 0.50, p < 0.0001). The mean IOP measured by GAT differed statistically significantly between eyes with glaucoma (n = 71, POAG and NTG) and eyes without damage (n = 59; OHT, GS, and healthy) (p < 0.0001), whereas the mean IOP by DCT did not (p = 0.935). The mean Delta IOP values were also statistically significantly higher in the glaucomatous group, with and without correction for CCT (p < 0.001). OPA and glaucoma diagnoses statistically significantly predicted Delta IOP (R-2 = 0.41, F-2.127 = 47.46, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Greater underestimation of IOP by GAT was observed in the glaucomatous eyes with thin corneas. Performing DCT on patients with thin corneas might be advantageous in establishing the need for more aggressive treatment.
引用
收藏
页码:1190 / 1197
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Corneal thickness and Intraocular pressure After DSAEK: comparison of Dynamic Contour tonometry with Goldmann Applanation tonometry
    Borges, Barbara
    Vicente, Andre
    Anjos, Rita
    Vieira, Luisa
    Santos, Arnaldo Dias
    Ferreira, Joana
    Maduro, Vitor
    Alves, Nuno
    Feijao, Joao
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2014, 55 (13)
  • [22] Correlation between Central Corneal Thickness and Intraocular Pressure Measured by Goldmann Applanation Tonometry or Pascal Dynamic Contour Tonometry
    Katsimpris, J. M.
    Theoulakis, P. E.
    Vasilopoulos, K.
    Skourtis, G.
    Papadopoulos, G. E.
    Petropoulos, I. K.
    KLINISCHE MONATSBLATTER FUR AUGENHEILKUNDE, 2015, 232 (04) : 414 - 418
  • [23] Intraoular pressure measurement - Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry
    Schneider, ED
    Grehn, F
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2005, 46
  • [24] Comparison of Dynamic Contour Tonometry and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry in Keratoconus
    Unterlauft, Jan Darius
    Schaedle, Nina
    Kasper, Karsten
    Klink, Thomas
    Geerling, Gerd
    CORNEA, 2011, 30 (10) : 1078 - 1082
  • [25] Comparison between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry correcting equations
    Maddalena De Bernardo
    Claudia Casaburi
    Ilaria De Pascale
    Luigi Capasso
    Ferdinando Cione
    Nicola Rosa
    Scientific Reports, 12
  • [26] Comparison between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry correcting equations
    De Bernardo, Maddalena
    Casaburi, Claudia
    De Pascale, Ilaria
    Capasso, Luigi
    Cione, Ferdinando
    Rosa, Nicola
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2022, 12 (01)
  • [27] Differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry and Dynamic Contour Tonometry in pseudoexfoliation syndrome
    Grammenandi, Emilia
    Detorakis, Efstathios T.
    Pallikaris, Ioannis G.
    Tsilimbaris, Miltiadis K.
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2010, 38 (05): : 444 - 448
  • [28] Differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry and Dynamic Contour Tonometry following Trabeculectomy
    Detorakis, Efstathios T.
    Grammenandi, Emilia
    Pallikaris, Ioannis G.
    Tsilimbaris, Miltiadis K.
    JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2010, 2010
  • [29] Evaluation of Goldmann applanation tonometry, rebound tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in keratoconus
    De Bernardo, Maddalena
    Rosa, Nicola
    JOURNAL OF OPTOMETRY, 2018, 11 (02) : 130 - 131
  • [30] 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
    Yoo, Chungkwon
    Eom, Young Sub
    Kim, Yong Yeon
    GRAEFES ARCHIVE FOR CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2010, 248 (11) : 1611 - 1616