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
  • [1] Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry for measuring intraocular pressure in normal tension glaucomatous eyes
    Wang, Jing Grace
    Latina, Mark A.
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2017, 58 (08)
  • [2] Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in healthy and glaucomatous eyes
    Ceruti, P.
    Morbio, R.
    Marraffa, M.
    Marchini, G.
    EYE, 2009, 23 (02) : 262 - 269
  • [3] Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in healthy and glaucomatous eyes
    P Ceruti
    R Morbio
    M Marraffa
    G Marchini
    Eye, 2009, 23 : 262 - 269
  • [4] Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometry,rebound tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in normal and glaucomatous eyes
    Fatih ?zcura
    Nilgün Yildirim
    Afsun Sahin
    Ertugrul ?olak
    International Journal of Ophthalmology, 2015, 8 (02) : 299 - 304
  • [5] Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometry,, rebound tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in normal and glaucomatous eyes
    Ozcura, Fatih
    Yildirim, Nilgun
    Sahin, Afsun
    Colak, Ertugrul
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2015, 8 (02) : 299 - 304
  • [6] Assessment of Factors Affecting the Difference in Intraocular Pressure Measurements Between Dynamic Contour Tonometry and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry
    Wang, Jing
    Cayer, Marie-Michelle
    Descovich, Denise
    Kamdeu-Fansi, Alvine
    Harasymowycz, Paul J.
    Li, Gisele
    Lesk, Mark R.
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2011, 20 (08) : 482 - 487
  • [7] Corneal parameters and difference between Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in normal eyes
    Lanza, Michele
    Borrelli, Maria
    De Bernardo, Maddalena
    Filosa, Maria Luisa
    Rosa, Nicola
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2008, 17 (06) : 460 - 464
  • [8] Comparison of intraocular pressure measurement by Dynamic Contour Tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry
    DeBry, PW
    Krishna, R
    Willoughby, TL
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2003, 44 : U372 - U372
  • [9] Intraocular pressure measurement - Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry
    Schneider, E
    Grehn, F
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2006, 15 (01) : 2 - 6
  • [10] Intraocular pressure measurements with Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in eyes after IntraLASIK or LASEK
    Shemesh, Gabi
    Soiberman, Uri
    Kurtz, Shimon
    CLINICAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2012, 6 : 1967 - 1970