Comparison of intraocular pressure adjusted by central corneal thickness or corneal biomechanical properties as measured in glaucomatous eyes using noncontact tonometers and the Goldmann applanation tonometer

被引:11
|
作者
Yaoeda, Kiyoshi [1 ,2 ]
Fukushima, Atsushi [1 ]
Shirakashi, Motohiro [3 ]
Fukuchi, Takeo [2 ]
机构
[1] Yaoeda Eye Clin, 2-1649-1 Naga Chou, Nagaoka, Niigata 9400053, Japan
[2] Niigata Univ, Grad Sch Med & Dent Sci, Div Ophthalmol & Visual Sci, Niigata, Japan
[3] Kido Eye Clin, Niigata, Japan
来源
CLINICAL OPHTHALMOLOGY | 2016年 / 10卷
基金
日本学术振兴会;
关键词
ocular response analyzer; corneal biomechanical property; corneal hysteresis; glaucoma; intraocular pressure;
D O I
10.2147/OPTH.S106836
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Purpose: To investigate the correlation coefficients between intraocular pressure (IOP) before and after adjusting for central corneal thickness (CCT) and corneal biomechanical properties. Patients and methods: A total of 218 eyes of 218 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (mean age =71.5 years; mean spherical equivalent =-0.51 D; mean deviation determined by Humphrey visual field analyzer =-3.22 dB) were included in this study. The tIOP and tIOPCCT, which were adjusted by the CCT (with tIOP meaning IOP not adjusted by CCT, as determined using the CT-1P; and tIOPCCT meaning IOP adjusted by CCT, as determined using the CT-1P), were determined using a noncontact tonometer. The IOPg and IOPCCT, which were adjusted by CCT, and IOPcc adjusted by corneal biomechanical properties were determined using a Reichert 7CR (with IOPg meaning IOP not adjusted by CCT or corneal biomechanical properties, as determined using the Reichert 7CR; IOPCCT meaning IOP adjusted by CCT, as determined using the Reichert 7CR; and IOPcc meaning IOP adjusted by corneal biomechanical properties, as determined using the Reichert 7CR). The GT and GTCCT adjusted by CCT were determined using a Goldmann applanation tonometer (with GT meaning IOP not adjusted by CCT, as determined using the Goldmann applanation tonometer; and with GTCCT meaning IOP adjusted by CCT, as determined using the GAT). Pearson's correlation coefficients among the IOPs were calculated and compared. P-values <0.05 were considered as statistically significant. Results: The tIOP, tIOPCCT, IOPg, IOPCCT, IOPcc, GT, and GTCCT were 14.8 +/- 2.5, 15.0 +/- 2.4, 13.1 +/- 3.2, 13.3 +/- 3.1, 13.7 +/- 2.9, 13.2 +/- 2.4, and 13.4 +/- 2.3 mmHg (mean +/- standard deviation), respectively. The correlation coefficient between tIOPCCT and tIOP (r=0.979) was significantly higher than that between tIOPCCT and the other IOPs (r=0.668-0.852; P<0.001, respectively). The correlation coefficient between IOPCCT and IOPg (r=0.994) or IOPcc and IOPg (r=0.892) was significantly higher than that between IOPCCT or IOPcc and the other IOPs (r=0.669-0.740; P<0.001, respectively). The correlation coefficient between GTCCT and GT (r=0.989) was significantly higher than that between GTCCT and the other IOPs (r=0.669-0.740; P<0.001, respectively). Conclusion: The IOP adjusted by CCT or corneal biomechanical properties depends on the measurement instrument itself, rather than the adjustment methods, for eyes of patients with primary open-angle glaucoma.
引用
收藏
页码:829 / 834
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The Influence of Central Corneal Thickness and Corneal Curvature Radius on The Intraocular Pressure as Measured By Different Tonometers: Noncontact and Goldmann Applanation Tonometers
    Harada, Yukinori
    Hirose, Naofumi
    Kubota, Toshiaki
    Tawara, Akihiko
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2008, 17 (08) : 619 - 625
  • [2] Central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure relationship in eyes with and without previous LASIK: Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometer with pneumatonometer
    Baypaktar, S
    Bayraktar, Z
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2005, 15 (01) : 81 - 88
  • [3] Comparability of Icare Pro Rebound Tonometer with Goldmann Applanation and Noncontact Tonometer in a Wide Range of Intraocular Pressure and Central Corneal Thickness
    Tamcelik, Nevbahar
    Atalay, Eray
    Cicik, Erdogan
    Ozkok, Ahmet
    OPHTHALMIC RESEARCH, 2015, 54 (01) : 18 - 25
  • [4] Influence of Corneal Biomechanical Properties on Intraocular Pressure Differences Between an Air-Puff Tonometer and the Goldmann Applanation Tonometer
    Tranchina, Laura
    Lombardo, Marco
    Oddone, Francesco
    Serrao, Sebastiano
    Lomoriello, Domenico Schiano
    Ducoli, Pietro
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2013, 22 (05) : 416 - 421
  • [5] The Difference in Intraocular Pressure Readings Between 3 Applanation Tonometers is Independent of Central Corneal Thickness, in Glaucomatous and Nonglaucomatous Eyes
    Baily, Caroline
    Dooley, Ian
    Collins, Niamh
    Hickey-Dwyer, Marie
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2014, 23 (09) : 620 - 623
  • [6] Effects of Central Corneal Stromal Thickness and Epithelial Thickness on Intraocular Pressure Using Goldmann Applanation and Non-Contact Tonometers
    Lee, Marvin
    Ahn, Jaehong
    PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (03):
  • [7] Effects of central corneal thickness and corneal curvature on the intraocular pressure measurement by Goldmann applanation tonometer and ocular blood flow pneumatonometer
    Saleh, Tarek A.
    Adams, Morag
    McDermott, Bill
    Claridge, Kate G.
    Ewings, Paul
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2006, 34 (06): : 516 - 520
  • [8] Comparison of intraocular pressure as measured by three different non-contact tonometers and goldmann applanation tonometer for non-glaucomatous subjects
    Bang, Seung Pil
    Lee, Chong Eun
    Kim, Yu Cheol
    BMC OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2017, 17
  • [9] Comparison of intraocular pressure as measured by three different non-contact tonometers and goldmann applanation tonometer for non-glaucomatous subjects
    Seung Pil Bang
    Chong Eun Lee
    Yu Cheol Kim
    BMC Ophthalmology, 17
  • [10] Comparison of Goldmann Applanation Tonometer, Noncontact Tonometer, and TonoPen XL for Intraocular Pressure Measurement in Different Types of Glaucomatous, Ocular Hypertensive, and Normal Eyes
    Kim, Na Rae
    Kim, Chan Yun
    Kim, Hyunjoong
    Seong, Gong Je
    Lee, Eun Suk
    CURRENT EYE RESEARCH, 2011, 36 (04) : 295 - 300