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] Assessment of intraocular pressure measured by Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer, Goldmann Applanation Tonometry, and Dynamic Contour Tonometry in healthy individuals
    Ouyang, Ping-Bo
    Li, Cong-Yi
    Zhu, Xiao-Hua
    Duan, Xuan-Chu
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2012, 5 (01) : 102 - 107
  • [22] Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry following penetrating keratoplasty
    Kandarakis, Artemios
    Soumplis, Vasileios
    Pitsas, Christos
    Kandarakis, Stylianos
    Halikias, Jiannis
    Karagiannis, Dimitrios
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY-JOURNAL CANADIEN D OPHTALMOLOGIE, 2010, 45 (05): : 489 - 493
  • [23] Effect of Corneal Morphometry on Dynamic Contour and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry
    Saenz-Frances, Federico
    Janez, Luis
    Borrego-Sanz, Lara
    Maria Martinez-de-la-Casa, Jose
    Jerez-Fidalgo, Maria
    Garcia-Sanchez, Julian
    Garcia-Feijoo, Julian
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2013, 22 (05) : 380 - 383
  • [24] Correlation Between Dynamic Contour Tonometry, Uncorrected and Corrected Goldmann Applanation Tonometry, and Stage of Glaucoma
    Wachtl, Josephine
    Toteberg-Harms, Marc
    Frimmel, Sonja
    Roos, Malgorzata
    Kniestedt, Christoph
    JAMA OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2017, 135 (06) : 601 - 608
  • [25] 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
  • [26] 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
  • [27] 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
  • [28] Evaluation of correction formulas for tonometry. The Goldmann applanation tonometry in approximation to dynamic contour tonometry
    Wachtl, J.
    Toeteberg-Harms, M.
    Frimmel, S.
    Kniestedt, C.
    OPHTHALMOLOGE, 2017, 114 (08): : 716 - 721
  • [29] A comparison between Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry after photorefractive keratectomy
    Afshin Lotfi Sadigh
    Rohollah F. Fouladi
    Hassan Hashemi
    Amir Houshang Beheshtnejad
    Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2013, 251 : 603 - 608
  • [30] 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