Intraocular pressure and corneal biomechanics in Fuchs’ endothelial dystrophy and after posterior lamellar keratoplasty

Purpose: To evaluate the precision of techniques for measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) in corneas with presumably altered biomechanical properties. Methods: Intraocular pressure was measured with a Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), ocular response analyzer (ORA) and dynamic contour tonometer (DCT) in 70 eyes. Thirty‐five eyes were normal corneas, 18 eyes had Fuchs’ endothelial dystrophy, and 17 eyes had undergone Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) surgery. Corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF) as well as central corneal thickness (CCT) were recorded with the ORA. Results: The measured cornea‐corrected IOP using ORA was significantly higher than GAT in all three groups (p < 0.001). The DCT differed significantly from the Goldmann only in the Fuchs’ group (p = 0.04). The Goldmann and DCT showed no significant between‐group differences, whereas IOP measured with the ORA was different between groups (p < 0.001). CH in the DSEAK group differed significantly from the controls (p < 0.001), but there was no significant difference between the DSEAK and Fuchs’ groups (p = 0.21). CCT did not differ significantly between the DSAEK and Fuchs’ group (p = 0.47). However, both these groups differed significantly from the controls (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Corneal hysteresis and CRF are reduced in Fuchs’ endothelial dystrophy as well as after posterior lamellar keratoplasty. GAT and DCT seem to measure IOP correctly in patients with Fuchs’ endothelial dystrophy as well as after posterior lamellar keratoplasty. Corneal‐corrected IOP as measured with the ORA appears to overestimate IOP in patients with Fuchs’ endothelial dystrophy as well as after posterior lamellar keratoplasty.     

Comparation of the new rebound tonometer IOPen and the Goldmann tonometer, and their relationship to corneal properties

Purpose

To compare the intraocular pressures (IOPs) obtained with the IOPen rebound tonometer, Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) and the ocular response analyzer (ORA) and investigate the effects of corneal biomechanical properties on IOPen measurements.

Methods

A total of 198 normal eyes were included in this cross-sectional and randomized study. Three measurements were taken using IOPen. Agreement between tonometers was calculated using the Bland and Altman limits of agreement (LoA) analysis.

Results

The median IOPen IOP was 3 mm Hg below the GAT (P<0.001), 3 mm Hg below the ORA IOP similar to Goldmann (IOPg), and 3 mm Hg below the ORA IOP corrected using corneal parameters (IOPcc)(P<0.01). The LoA width between the IOPen and GAT IOPs varied between 13.92 (mean IOPen IOP) and 15.99 mm Hg (third IOPen measurement). The central corneal thickness (CCT) was unrelated to IOPen measurements (P>0.05). Corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal rigidity factor (CRF) were correlated with IOPen and GAT.

Conclusions

IOPen underestimated the IOP compared with GAT and ORA. The effect of measurement quality or measurement order on IOPen was low. CCT did not affect the IOPen, but the CH and CRF did. The LoA width between the IOPen and GAT IOPs was higher than between the ORA IOPg or ORA IOPcc and GAT IOPs.     

Comparison of IOP measurements between ORA and GAT in normal Chinese.

PURPOSE: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) obtained from the ocular response analyzer (ORA) and Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) on a group of normal Chinese. METHODS: One hundred twenty-five normal subjects were recruited, with one eye randomly selected for this study. Each eye was measured first with the noncontact tonometer ORA, followed by the GAT and ultrasound pachometry, in a randomized order. Four readings were obtained from the ORA, and three measurements were taken with the GAT. The mean was used for analysis. The ORA provided a Goldmann-correlated IOP (IOPg) and a corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc). Three central corneal thickness (CCT) values were measured using an ultrasound pachometer, and the mean was used for analysis. RESULTS: IOP obtained from the ORA was similar to that from the GAT (IOPg minus GAT: mean difference = 0.33 mm Hg, 95% limits of agreement = 4.55 to -4.44 mm Hg; IOPcc minus GAT: mean difference = 0.24 mm Hg, 95% limits of agreement = 4.83 to -5.07 mm Hg). CCT was positively associated with corneal hysteresis (CH) (r2 = 0.30, p < 0.01), corneal resistance factor (r2 = 0.38, p < 0.01), GAT (r2 = 0.09, p < 0.01) and IOPg (r2 = 0.16, p < 0.01). IOPcc was not associated with CCT (r2 = 0.01, p = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: Both IOPg and IOPcc have good agreement with GAT on normal subjects. The influence of CCT on IOPcc was insignificant.     

三种眼压计与Pentacam眼压校正系统的应用比较

目的:比较非接触式眼压计(NCT)、Goldmann压平式眼压计(GAT)、动态轮廓眼压计(DCT)和Pentacam三维眼前节分析系统四种方法检查眼压的差异,并研究它们与中央角膜厚度(CCT)和中央角膜曲率(CCV)的关系。方法:对拟行LASIK手术的143例286眼患者用Pentacam系统测量CCT和CCV后,分别用NCT,GAT和DCT测量眼压,并用Pentacam系统的Ehlers,Shah,Dresden,Orssengo/Pye和Kohlhaas5种眼压校正方法对NCT眼压值进行校正,将测量结果进行方差分析、相关性及线性回归分析。结果:DCT值最高,DCT与其他方法之间均有显著性差异(P<0.01);GAT与DCT,Kohlhaas,Shah之间有差异(P<0.05),与其他方法之间无差异;各组眼压值之间有较好的相关性,GAT与DCT的相关性最强(r=0.702);NCT受CCT影响最大,GAT受CCV影响最大,DCT,Dresden,Orssengo/Pye,Shah与CCT和CCV均不存在相关性(P>0.05)。结论:对CCT和CCV正常的健康人群进行青光眼筛查时建议使用压平式眼压计,对可疑的患者,尤其是CCT和CCV偏离正常的患者,宜进一步行DCT检查或者用Pentacam系统进行眼压校正。     

Comparison of the rebound tonometer with the Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients

PURPOSE: To determine the agreement between the measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) by the rebound tonometer (RBT) and by the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) and to find out the effect of central corneal thickness (CCT) values on IOP measurements in glaucoma patients. METHODS: IOP was measured with the RBT and GAT, respectively, in 61 eyes of 61 glaucoma patients. CCT was measured using an ultrasonic pachymeter after all IOP determinations had been made. The mean IOP measurement by the RBT was compared with the measurement by the GAT, by Student's t-test. Bland-Altman analysis was performed to assess the clinical agreement between the two methods. The effect of CCT on measured IOP was explored by linear regression analysis. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 56.7+/-21.1 years (range: 30-80 years). There were 32 (52.46%) women and 29 (47.54%) men in the study group. The mean IOP readings were 18.70+/-4.76 mmHg using the RBT, and 18.27+/-3.49 mmHg using the GAT. The difference was not statistically significant (mean difference 0.43+/-2.55, P=0.2). A frequency distribution of the differences demonstrated that in more than 80% of cases the IOP readings differed by <2.3 mmHg between the RBT and GAT. There was a strong correlation between the RBT and GAT readings (r=0.852, P<0.0001). The IOP measurements with the two methods were correlated with CCT (r=0.40, P=0.02 for the RBT and r=0.48, P<0.0001 for the GAT). The IOP increased 1.1 mmHg and 8 mmHg for every 100-microm increase in CCT for the GAT and RBT, respectively. CONCLUSION: The RBT slightly overestimated the IOP value by 0.43 mmHg on average when compared with the GAT. Nevertheless, the RBT readings appeared to be more affected by the various thicknesses of different corneas when compared with those obtained using the GAT.     

Comparison of ICare tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients

PURPOSE: To compare the intraocular pressure (IOP) readings taken with the new ICare tonometer and with the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) and to evaluate the influence of central corneal thickness (CCT) on the IOP measurements. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One eye of 178 consecutive patients with primary open-angle glaucoma underwent ultrasonic CCT measurement, followed by IOP evaluation with the GAT and with the ICare tonometer. The deviation of ICare readings from GAT values, corrected according to the Doughty and Zaman formula, was calculated and correlated to CCT by a linear regression model. The agreement between the 2 devices was assessed by use of the Bland-Altman method. RESULTS: The average CCT was 552+/-39 mum. The mean IOP and the mean corrected IOP with GAT were 19.4+/-5.4 mm Hg, and 18.5+/-5.7 mm Hg, respectively. The mean ICare IOP reading was 18.4+/-5.2 mm Hg. The deviations of ICare readings from corrected GAT values were highly correlated with CCT values (r=0.63, P<0.01). Linear regression analysis showed that a CCT change of 10 mum resulted in an ICare reading deviation of 0.7 mm Hg. The Bland-Altman scatter-plot showed a reasonable agreement between the 2 tonometers. CONCLUSIONS: The ICare tonometer can be useful in a routine clinical setting. The IOP readings are quite in accordance with those obtained by GAT. The measurements seemed to be influenced by CCT variations, and thus pachymetry should always be taken into consideration.     

Intraocular pressure measurement over soft contact lens by rebound tonometer:a comparative study

AIM: To evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements by Icare rebound tonometer over a contact lens in comparison with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT).METHODS: Fifty patients using contact lens were included in this study. One of the eyes of the patients was selected randomly and their IOP were measured by rebound tonometer with and without contact lens (RTCL, RT respectively) and by GAT, as well as their central corneal thickness (CCT) by optical pachymeter. The results of both methods were compared by correlation analysis, general linear method repeated measure and Bland-Altman analysis.RESULTS: Mean IOP values measured by RTCL, RT and GAT were 15.68±3.7, 14.50±3.4 and 14.16±2.8 (P<0.001), respectively. Mean IOP by RTCL was significantly higher than the measurements implemented by RT and GAT (P<0.001), while there was no difference between the measurements by GAT and RT (P=0.629). There was a good level of positive correlation between GAT and RTCL as well as RT (r=0.786 P<0.001, r=0.833 P<0.001, respectively). We have observed that CCT increase did not show any correlation with the differences of the measurements between RTCL and RT (P=0.329), RTCL and GAT (P=0.07) as well as RT and GAT (P=0.189) in linear regression model.CONCLUSION: The average of the measurements over contact lens by rebound tonometer was found to be higher than what was measured by GAT. Although this difference is statistically significant, it may be clinically negligible in the normal population.     

PASCAL动态轮廓眼压计临床应用的初步报告

目的:验证动态轮廓眼压计(DCT)的临床性能。方法:对81例143眼青光眼及可疑病例青光眼患者用DCT测量眼内压(IOP);132眼同时用Goldmann压平眼压计(GAT)测量眼压,部分病例同时用NIDEKUP-1000型角膜测厚仪测量中央角膜厚度(CCT)。GAT与DCT测量结果采用配对t检验,GAT、DCT测量值与CCT的关系及DCT测量值与眼脉动振幅(OPA)的相关关系采用Spearman双变量相关分析。结果:①DCT和GAT测得的眼压均数分别为(18.6±3.9)mmHg和(17.4±4.1)mmHg;DCT测得的眼压值高于GAT,其差值均数为(1.1±2.3)mmHg;两种眼压计测得的眼压值呈正相关(r=0.83,P<0.01)。②116眼同时完成了DCT眼压测量及CCT测量,两者相关系数r=0.03,P=0.77;113眼同时完成了GAT眼压测量及CCT测量,两者相关系数r=0.28,P=0.003。③143眼同时记录了DCT眼压值和眼脉动振幅(OPA),其均数分别为(18.6±3.9)mmHg和(2.6±1.1)mmHg,两者的相关系数r=0.32,P<0.01。结论:以上结果初步证实:①DCT眼压计测量值与GAT眼压测量值高度相关,但DCT测量值略高于GAT测量值,提示DCT可用于临床诊断。②DCT测量值与CCT不相关,GAT测量值与CCT显著相关,提示DCT在青光眼诊断中有独特优势。③DCT测量的OPA与IOP值显著相关,相关的机制及临床意义有待探讨。     

The relative effects of corneal thickness and age on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry

AIMS: To establish the effects of central corneal thickness (CCT) on intraocular pressure (IOP) measured with a prototype Pascal dynamic contour tonometer (DCT), to evaluate the effect of CCT and age on the agreement between IOP measured with the Pascal DCT and Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), and to compare the interobserver and intraobserver variation of the DCT with the GAT. METHODS: GAT and DCT IOP measurements were made on 130 eyes of 130 patients and agreement was assessed by means of Bland-Altman plots. The effect of CCT and age on GAT/DCT IOP differences was assessed by linear regression analysis. Interobserver and intraobserver variations for GAT and DCT were assessed in 100 eyes of 100 patients. RESULTS: The mean difference (95% limits of agreement) between GAT and DCT was -0.7 (-6.3 to 4.9) mm Hg. GAT/DCT IOP differences increased with thicker CCT (slope 0.017 mm Hg/microm, 95% CI 0.004 to 0.03, r2 = 0.05, p = 0.01), and with greater age, slope 0.05 mm Hg/year (95% CI 0.012 to 0.084, r2 = 0.05, p = 0.01). The intraobserver variability of GAT and DCT was 1.7 mm Hg and 3.2 mm Hg, respectively. The interobserver variability was (mean difference (95% limits of agreement)) 0.4 (-3.5 to 4.2) mm Hg for GAT and 0.2 (-4.9 to 5.3) mm Hg for DCT. CONCLUSIONS: GAT is significantly more affected than DCT by both CCT and subject age. The effect of age suggests an age related corneal biomechanical change that may induce measurement error additional to that of CCT. The prototype DCT has greater measurement variability than the GAT.     

Corneal thickness- and age-related biomechanical properties of the cornea measured with the ocular response analyzer

PURPOSE: The Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) is a new instrument that measures the corneal biomechanical response (corneal hysteresis, CH) to rapid indentation by an air jet. CH is the difference in applanation pressures (P1, P2) between the rising and falling phases of the air jet. The investigation had two parts: a characterization study and a validation study. In the characterization study, the purposes were to investigate the intraocular pressure (IOP)-dependence of CH and to characterize the performance of the ORA. In the validation study, the purposes were to investigate the association between CH and both age and central corneal thickness (CCT) and the agreement between ORA and Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) IOP measurements. METHODS: For the characterization study, data were collected from 105 untreated subjects (45 ocular hypertensive patients and 60 normal subjects; mean age, 60 years, range, 26-82). GAT and ORA measurements were performed before and after IOP lowering of one randomly selected eye with apraclonidine drops. The change in P1 and P2 (arbitrary units) in relation to change in GAT IOP was analyzed to calibrate the instrument. The relation between P1, P2, and CCT was explored and ORA IOP was derived from the analyses. For the validation study, ORA and GAT IOP and CCT were measured in 144 eyes of 144 untreated subjects (mean age, 58 years; range, 19-83). The characterization calculations were applied to the dataset and values of CH and ORA IOP were calculated. The relationship between CH and both subject age and CCT was determined. The associations between CH and CCT and between ORA and GAT IOPs, were investigated by linear regression analysis. The agreement between measuring devices was calculated. RESULTS: In the characterization study, P1 changed by 6.41 arbitrary units for every 1-mm Hg change in GAT IOP. CH (P1 - P2) changed by -1.60 arbitrary units for every 1-mm Hg change in GAT IOP. For each unit change in P2, P1 changed by 1.27 units. From this association a new IOP-independent corneal factor was derived [P1 - (P2/1.27)] and is termed the corneal constant factor (CCF; mm Hg). ORA IOP normalized for CCF was defined as P2 - CCF (mm Hg). The CCF (mm Hg) was associated with CCT (micrometers) and with age: CCF = [(0.036 . CCT) - (0.028 . age)] + 1.06 (adjusted r2 = 0.34; P < 0.0001 for CCT, P = 0.007 for age). Normalized ORA IOP measurements were not associated with CCT. GAT IOP was associated with CCT and CCF-more strongly with the latter: GAT IOP = (0.03 . CCT)+1.52 (r2 = 0.06, P = 0.002); GAT IOP = (0.65 . CCF) + 4.5 (r2 = 0.13, P < 0.0001). The mean difference (95% limits of agreement) between GAT and normalized ORA IOP was 0.1 (-6.6 to +6.8) mm Hg. CONCLUSIONS: The CCF describes an IOP-independent biomechanical property of the cornea that increases with thicker CCT and decreases with greater age. It is moderately strongly associated with CCT and yet explains more of the interindividual variation in GAT IOP than does CCT. Normalized ORA IOP measurements are not associated with CCT.     

中央角膜厚度对3种眼压计眼压测量值的影响

目的比较分析不同中央角膜厚度(central corneal thickness,CCT)下Icare回弹式眼压计、Goldmann压平式眼压计(Goldmann applanation tonometer,GAT)和动态轮廓眼压计(dynamic contour tonometry,DCT)的眼压测量结果,探讨CCT对3种眼压计测量值的影响。方法 对78例患者152眼分别用Icare、GAT、DCT3种眼压计进行眼压测量,并进行CCT的测量,对比不同CCT下3种眼压计的测量结果,分析眼压测量值与CCT的关系。结果 在全部受测者中Icare、GAT、DCT测得的眼压均值分别为(19.16±5.03)mmHg(1 kPa=7.5 mmHg)、(18.41±4.52)mmHg和(17.23±3.69)mmHg,三者之间有显著差异(F=7.256,P=0.001)。Icare和GAT的眼压测量值均与CCT显著相关(r=0.341,P<0.001;r=0.333,P<0.001),CCT每改变10μm,Icare的眼压值改变0.47 mmHg,GAT的眼压值改变0.41 mmHg;而DCT的眼压测量值与CCT无显著相关(r=0.032,P=0.699)。结论 Icare、GAT的眼压测量值均明显受CCT的影响,而Icare受CCT影响的程度较GAT的稍大,DCT的眼压测量值基本不受CCT的影响。     

Ocular response analyzer versus Goldmann applanation tonometry for intraocular pressure measurements

PURPOSE: To establish correlations between intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained with the ocular response analyzer (ORA) and the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT). The effects of central corneal thickness on the measures obtained were also examined. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. IOP was determined in 48 eyes of 48 patients with glaucoma In all patients, central corneal thickness (CCT) was measured by ultrasound pachymetry. RESULTS: ORA readings were consistently higher than GAT measurements (Goldmann-correlated IOP - IOP GAT mean difference, 7.2 +/- 3.5 mm Hg; corneal-compensated IOP - IOP GAT mean difference, 8.3 +/- 4.0 mm Hg) However, differences were not constant and increased with increasing IOP GAT readings, both with respect to Goldmann-correlated IOP (slope = 0.623, P < 0.0001) and corneal-compensated IOP (slope = 0.538, P < 0.0001). Both pressure measurements provided by the ORA showed significant correlation with CCT (CCT versus Goldmann-correlated IOP: r = 0.460, P = 0.001; CCT versus corneal-compensated IOP: r = 0.442, P = 0.001). No significant effects of corneal curvature or refraction on any of the pressures were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The ORA significantly overestimates IOP compared with the GAT. Differences between both sets of measures increase as the GAT-determined IOP increases. ORA readings seem to be affected by central corneal thickness.     

动态轮廓眼压计与非接触式眼压计的比较

目的探讨中央角膜厚度和角膜曲率对轮廓动态眼压计以及非接触式眼压计眼压测量结果的影响。方法接受准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术(LASIK)的近视患者27例(54只眼),分别于术前和术后第4周使用非接触式眼压计(NCT)和动态轮廓眼压计(DCT)进行眼压测量。多元线性相关分析研究NCT、DCT测量值和角膜曲率及角膜中央厚度(CCT)之间的相关性。结果LASIK术后NCT测量值降低,而DCT测量值和术前比较差异则无统计学意义。角膜曲率、CCT和NCT读数呈线性相关,而与DCT读数无关。结论DCT测量眼压不受角膜曲率和中央角膜厚度影响,因此更适合于正常眼以及曾经接受角膜屈光手术眼的眼压测量。     

The effect of contact lens-induced corneal edema on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry

Purpose  To evaluate the effect of contact lens-induced corneal edema on intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements using Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) in Asian subjects. Participants  The study included 40 eyes of 20 normal volunteers with no evidence of ocular disease. Methods  Forty eyes of 20 healthy volunteers were required to wear soft contact lenses for 2 hours to induce corneal swelling. Central corneal thickness (CCT) and IOP were measured before and immediately after contact lens wear using specular microscope, GAT, and DCT. The IOP measurements by GAT and DCT were compared. The changes in the CCT and the IOP measurements after wearing contact lenses were assessed. Results  The mean CCT of the 40 eyes evaluated was 532.6 ± 31.6 μm. The mean IOP was 11.78 ± 2.04 mmHg for the GAT and 14.46 ± 1.89 mmHg for the DCT, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.001). After wearing contact lenses, the mean CCT was 553.2 ± 34.3 μm, which was 20.6 ± 12.9 μm greater than before wearing them (P < 0.001). The mean IOP measurements of the GAT and DCT were decreased after wearing the contact lenses. The mean decrease of the GAT values was 0.43 ± 1.95 mmHg, which was not statistically significant (P = 0.175). However, the mean decrease of the DCT readings, which was 0.75 ± 1.74 mm Hg, was statistically significant (P = 0.010). Conclusion  The IOP measurements with DCT were significantly higher than those with GAT in healthy Asian eyes. Although the mean IOP measurements of both the GAT and the DCT were decreased in the edematous cornea, IOP measurements of the DCT were more affected by corneal edema than were the GAT. The authors have no proprietary, commercial, or financial interests in any of the products described in this study.     

Influence of corneal structure, corneal responsiveness, and other ocular parameters on tonometric measurement of intraocular pressure

PURPOSE: To estimate the relationships between ocular parameters and tonometrically measured intraocular pressure (IOP), to determine the influence of ocular parameters on different instrument measurements of IOP, and to evaluate the association of ocular parameters with a parameter called hysteresis. METHODS: Patients presenting at a glaucoma clinic were recruited for this study. Subjects underwent IOP measurement with the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), the TonoPen, and the Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA), and also measurements of central corneal thickness (CCT), axial length, corneal curvature, corneal astigmatism, central visual acuity, and refractive error. Chart information was reviewed to determine glaucoma treatment history. The ORA instrument provided a measurement called corneal hysteresis. The association between measured IOP and the other ocular characteristics was estimated using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Among 230 patients, IOP measurements from the TonoPen read lowest, and ORA read highest, and GAT measurements were closest to the mean IOP of the 3 instruments. In a multiple regression model adjusting for age, sex, race, and other ocular characteristics, a 10 microm increase in CCT was associated with an increase of 0.79 mm Hg measured IOP in untreated eyes (P<0.0001). Of the 3 tonometers, GAT was the least affected by CCT (0.66 mm Hg/10 mum, P<0.0001). Hysteresis was significantly correlated with CCT with a modest correlation coefficient (r=0.20, P<0.0007). CONCLUSIONS: Among parameters related to measured IOP, features in addition to CCT, such as hysteresis and corneal curvature, may also be important. Tonometric instruments seem to be affected differently by various physiologic characteristics.     

Assessment of intraocular pressure measured by Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer, Goldmann Applanation Tonometry, and Dynamic Contour Tonometry in healthy individuals

AIM: To investigate the accuracy of intraocular pressure (IOP) as measured by a Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA), as well as the relationship between central corneal thickness (CCT) and IOP as measured by ORA, Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), and dynamic contour tonometry (DCT). METHODS: A total of 158 healthy individuals (296 eyes) were chosen randomly for measurement of IOP. After CCT was measured using A-ultrasound (A-US), IOP was measured by ORA, GAT, and DCT devices in a randomized order. The IOP values acquired using each of the three tonometries were compared, and the relationship between CCT and IOP values were analyzed separately. Two IOP values, Goldmann-correlated IOP value (IOPg) and corneal-compensated intraocular pressure (IOPcc), were got using ORA. Three groups were defined according to CCT: 1) thin cornea (CCT<520μm); 2) normal-thickness cornea (CCT: 520–580μm); and 3) thick cornea (CCT>580μm) groups. RESULTS: In normal subjects, IOP measurements were 14.95±2.99mmHg with ORA (IOPg), 15.21±2.77mmHg with ORA (IOPcc), 15.22±2.77mmHg with GAT, and 15.49±2.56mmHg with DCT. Mean differences were 0.01±2.29mmHg between IOPcc and GAT (P>0.05) and 0.28±2.20mmHg between IOPcc and DCT (P>0.05). There was a greater correlation between IOPcc and DCT (r=0.946, P=0.000) than that between IOPcc and GAT (r=0.845, P=0.000). DCT had a significant correlation with GAT (r=0.854, P=0.000). GAT was moderately correlated with CCT (r=0.296, P<0.001), while IOPcc showed a weak but significant correlation with CCT (r=?0.155, P=0.007). There was a strong negative correlation between CCT and the difference between IOPcc and GAT(r=-0.803,P=0.000), with every 10μm increase in CCT resulting in an increase in this difference of 0.35mmHg. The thick cornea group (CCT>580μm) showed the least significant correlation between IOPcc and GAT (r=0.859, P=0.000); while the thin cornea group (CCT＜520μm) had the most significant correlation between IOPcc and GAT (r=0.926, P=0.000). The correlated differences between IOPcc and DCT were not significant in any of the three groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Measurement of IOP by ORA has high repeatability and is largely consistent with GAT measurements. Moreover, the ORA measurements are affected only to a small extent by CCT, and are likely to be much closer to the real IOP value than GAT.     

中央角膜厚度、角膜曲率对Goldmann压平眼压计和非接触眼压计测量结果的影响

目的 探讨中央角膜厚度和角膜曲率对Goldmann压平眼压计(GAT)和非接触眼压计(NCT)测量结果 的影响.方法 比较性研究.选择120例门诊患者作为研究对象.应用超声角膜测厚仪测量患者中央角膜厚度,采用多功能验光仪测量角膜曲率,应用GAT和NCT测量受检者双眼眼压.应用SPSS 12.0统计学软件进行数据处理.采用直线回归法比较两种眼压计的测量结果 ,采用多重线性同归法分析中央角膜厚度、角膜曲率与两种眼压计所测眼压值的关系,应用Bland-Altman法比较NCT和GAT两种方法 对眼压测最结果 的影响.结果 GAT与NCT测量的平均眼压值分别为(18.4±4.0)mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa)和(17.0±4.6)mm Hg,差异有统计学意义(r=0.835,P=0.000).GAT和NCT测量的眼压值均受中央角膜厚度和角膜曲率的影响.中央角膜厚度每增加1μm,GAT测量眼压值增加0.039 mm Hg,而NCT测量眼压值增加0.064 mm Hg.角膜曲率半径每增加1 mm,GAT测最眼压值减少2.648 mm Hg,NCT测量眼压值减少3.190 nun Hg.中央角膜厚度对NCT测量眼压值的影响较其对于GAT测量眼压值的影响大.随着眼压的升高,NCT测最眼压值呈现出由低于GAT测量值到高于GAT测量值的逐渐变化趋势.结论 中央角膜厚度和角膜曲率均会影响NCT和GAT测量眼压值,而且中央角膜厚度对NCT测量眼压值的影响较其对GAT测量眼压值的影响大.     

眼反应分析仪与非接触眼压计眼压测量的对比观察

目的比较眼反应分析仪(ORA)与非接触眼压计(NCT)测量眼压结果的差异,分析ORA、NCT测量结果与角膜中央厚度(CCT)的关系。方法近视患者57例(114只眼),于准分子激光手术前行ORA测量,得出角膜补偿眼压(IOPcc)和Goldmann相关眼压值(IOPg)两个数值,NCT测眼压3次取平均值。结果 ORA测得IOPcc平均值16.85 mm Hg,IOPpg平均值15.26 mm Hg,NCT眼压计测得平均值15.66 mm Hg;IOPcc>NCT>IOPg。IOPcc、IOPg与NCT所测眼压值比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。NCT和IOPg均与CCT呈正相关(r:分别为0.463和0.419,P<0.05);IOPcc与CCT无相关性(r:0.230,P>0.05)。结论 ORA测量屈光不正患者的眼压与NCT测量结果存在一定差异,其中IOPcc不受角膜厚度的影响,在临床运用中准确性较好。     

Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry in relation to central corneal thickness in primary congenital glaucoma

Background

To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained with dynamic contour tonometer (DCT) and Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), and to investigate their relationship to central corneal thickness (CCT) in primary congenital glaucoma (PCG) eyes.

Methods

Thirty-one eyes of 31 PCG patients (25.7?±?7.2 years old) were examined. PCG was defined as elevated IOP, enlarged corneal diameter (buphthalmos), Haab’s striae and abnormal findings at gonioscopy. The mean of three measurements of GAT, DCT (quality scores 1 and 2), and CCT were obtained and assessed for agreement by means of Bland–Altman plot and for Spearman correlation test.

Results

Mean CCT was 534?±?72.3 μm (range: 430 to 610 μm). Mean IOP measurements were 15.1?±?4.2 mmHg (range: 5.5 to 22.7 mmHg) for DCT and 14.5?±?5.6 mmHg (range: 7.0 to 34.0 mmHg) for GAT (P?=?0.244). Spearman correlation tests showed that IOP difference (DCT ? GAT) was not correlated with CCT (r ²?=?0.023, P?=?0.417). IOP measurements by DCT were weakly but statistically correlated with those obtained with GAT (r²?=?0.213, P?=?0.0089). Bland–Altman analysis revealed poor agreement between DCT and GAT readings, considering the 95 % confidence intervals of ±10.45 mmHg.

Conclusions

The differences between DCT and GAT readings were not influenced by CCT in this series of patients. Considering the weak correlation and the poor agreement observed between GAT and DCT measurements and that they both may be affected by corneal biomechanical changes, these methods should not be used interchangeably, and may possibly give no meaningful IOP values in PCG patients.     

Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with goldmann applanation tonometry

PURPOSE: The dynamic contour tonometer (DCT; Pascal tonometer) is a novel tonometer designed to measure intraocular pressure (IOP) independent of corneal properties. The purpose of this study was a comparison of the DCT with the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) with respect to mean of IOP readings, the influence of ocular structural factors on IOP readings, and both intra- and interobserver variability, in a large group of healthy subjects. METHODS: In a prospective study of 228 eyes, IOP measurements by GAT and DCT were compared, and the effects of central corneal thickness (CCT), corneal curvature, axial length, and anterior chamber depth were analyzed. To evaluate intra- and interobserver variability, IOP was measured in eight eyes by four observers. RESULTS: There was a high concordance between the IOP readings obtained by DCT and GAT. However, IOP readings were consistently higher with DCT than with GAT (median difference: +1.7 mm Hg, interquartile range [25th-75th percentile] = 0.8-2.7 mm Hg). In contrast to GAT, multivariable regression analysis showed no significant effect of corneal thickness, corneal curvature, astigmatism, anterior chamber depth, and axial length on DCT readings. For repeated measurements the intraobserver variability was 0.65 mm Hg for the DCT and 1.1 mm Hg for the GAT (P = 0.008). Interobserver variability was 0.44 mm Hg for the DCT and 1.28 mm Hg for the GAT (P = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: IOP measurements by DCT are highly concordant with IOP readings obtained from GAT but do not vary in CCT and have a lower intra- and interobserver variability. DCT seems to be an appropriate method of tonometry for routine clinical use.