DCT和GAT对LASIK手术前后眼压的比较性研究

目的 评价动态轮廓眼压计(DCT)和Goldmann压平眼压计(GAT)对在准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术(LASIK)手术前后眼压测量值的变化.方法 取71例141只眼近视患者在LASIK术前和术后一周分别进行角膜厚度(CCT)、GAT、DCT测量.结果 ①LASIK手术前后DCT测得值尤显著性差异(P=0.062),GAT测得值有显著性差异(P＜0.001),CCT测得值有显著性差异(P＜0001).②Bland-Altman分析示LASIK手术前后DCT与GAT两种测量方法均呈现高度一致性.术前DCT测量值高于GAT测量值1.1mmHg,95%可信区间为(-0.6,2.8)mmHg;术后DCT测量值高于GAT测量值8.2mmHg,95%可信区间为(5.3,11.1)mmhg.③△GAT与△CCT呈正相关,△DCT与△CCT无统计相关性.结论 DCT测量值不受LASIK手术切削的影响,更适合于LASIK手术前后眼压的测量.     

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。     

动态轮廓眼压计与压平眼压计的比较

目的:评价和比较动态轮廓眼压计和Goldmann压平眼压计测得的LASIK手术后眼压值。方法:接受准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术(LASIK)的近视患者34例68眼,分别于术前和术后3mo使用动态轮廓眼压计(Pascal dynamic contour tonometer,PDCT)和Goldmann压平眼压计(the Goldmann applanation tonometer,GAT)进行眼压测量。比较手术前后两种测量方法测得的眼压值的差异。多元线性相关分析研究GAT,PDCT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手术后GAT测量值较术前低,而PDCT值和术前比较差异则无统计学意义。角膜曲率、CCT和GAT读数呈线性相关,而与PDCT读数无关。结论:GAT测量得到的眼压低于实际值。PDCT测眼压不受角膜曲率和中央角膜厚度影响。     

轮廓动态眼压计测量准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术后眼压

目的通过与Goldmann眼压计(goldmann appla-nation tonometer,GAT)的比较,评价轮廓动态眼压计(dynamiccontour tonometer,DCT)在准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术(laser insitu keratomileusis,LASIK)前和术后眼压测量中的应用价值。方法在术前以及术后第1周和第4周,分别用GAT和DCT测量30例60眼的眼压,对所得结果采用SPSS 11.5统计分析软件进行统计学处理。结果中央角膜厚度(centralcorneal thickness,CCT)和GAT读数相关,而与DCT读数无关。术前眼压和术后第1周、第4周的眼压比较,GAT读数分别下降(5.00±1.12)mmHg和(5.45±1.13)mmHg,DCT则无显著性差异。结论LASIK导致的CCT变化可影响GAT测量结果的准确性,但对DCT无影响,因此,DCT更适用于正常眼以及曾接受LASIK手术眼的眼压测量。     

LASIK对非接触型眼压计测量眼压的影响

目的：分析准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术（ｌａｓｅｒ ｉｎ ｓｉｔｕ ｋｅｒａｔｏｍｉｌｅｕｓｉｓ,ＬＡＳＩＫ）治疗近视眼术后眼压的影响因素。方法：采用ＬＡＳＩＫ治疗２１４只近视眼。用非接触式眼压计测量术前、术后的眼压。对眼压与术前、术后各因素进行相关分析和多元逐步回归分析。结果：ＬＡＳＩＫ术后１月的眼压明显低于术前,差异具有显著性意义（ｓｔｕｄｅｎｔ ｔ检验,Ｐ〈０．０００１）。ＬＳＡＩＫ术后眼压的降     

轮廓动态眼压计在LASEK手术中应用的临床研究

目的:丝裂霉素C(mitomycin C,MMC)在LASEK术中应用对眼压的影响及轮廓动态眼压计在LASEK术中的应用。方法:在术前和术后1,4,12wk,分别采用轮廓动态眼压计(dynamic contour tonometer,DCT)测量接受LASEK治疗的对照组和MMC组近视患者各150眼的眼内压。结果:术前MMC组和对照组DCT眼压值分别为17.17±2.35,18.12±2.41mmHg。术后1,4,12wkMMC组和对照组DCT眼压值分别为17.09±2.72,17.24±2.39,17.12±2.67,17.52±2.47,18.01±2.69,17.66±2.54mmHg。手术前、后眼压差异无统计学意义。对照组和MMC组术前和术后1,4,12wkDCT眼压值,差异均无统计学意义。结论:DCT测量眼压可能更适合于曾经接受角膜屈光手术眼的眼压测量。通过DCT监测手术前、后眼压,丝裂霉素C对LASEK术后眼压无明显影响。     

LASIK前后眼压测量方法选择

目的 比较四种常用眼压计在近视准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术(Laserin situ eratomileusis,LASIK)前后的应用,探讨LASIK手术前后眼压测量方式的选择,以做到术前高眼压患者筛查及术后患者青光眼的早期发现.方法 对71例接受LASIK手术近视眼患者按等效球镜分为三组,分别在术前和术后1个月和3个月采用Schiotz眼压计(Schiotztonometer,ST)、Goldmann眼压计(Goldmann applanationtonometry,GAT)、非接触眼压计(non-contacttonometer,NCT)和Tono-Pen眼压计(TP)测量眼压,同时记录手术前后角膜中央厚度.结果 各屈光度组间同时间点相同眼压计测量值差异无统计学意义,术前除GAT、TP外其他眼压计差异有统计学意义,术后各眼压计测量值均降低,TP受角膜变化影响较小,GAT及NCT受影响明显,三者均与术前GAT值相关.ST不受角膜变化影响但其测量值明显偏高且术后与术前GAT无相关关系.结论 术前采用TP或GAT均可,术后应用TP,而NCT可作为术前筛查辅助手段.ST的应用仍有待探讨.     

LASIK前后非接触性眼压测定值的变化分析

目的　分析 L ASIK手术前后气动眼压值的变化。方法　应用 NIDEKEC- 2 0 0 0非接触眼压计测量眼压 (NCT) ,术前及术后 2 0天左右测 3次取平均值。共 4 6 6例 (82 7只眼 )。根据术前屈光度分为 4组 ,对各组所测术前、术后眼压值进行比较分析。结果　各组术前与术后 2 0天左右眼压值对比 ,均有显著性差异 ,除 C组外 ,0 .0 1

相似文献   

动态轮廓眼压计和Pentacam眼压校正系统在LASIK手术前后应用比较

目的比较动态轮廓眼压计（DCT）和Pentacam眼压校正系统在LASIK手术前后的应用价值。方法对行LASIK手术的65例（129眼）于术前和术后1个月用Pentacam系统测量中央角膜厚度（CCT）和角膜曲率（CCV）后,分别用非接触眼压计（NCT）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,将测量结果进行统计学分析。结果DCT值在手术前后均最高,DCT值和Ehlers法校正值术前与术后比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;其他方法眼压校正值术前与术后比较,差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．01）,术前与术后各组眼压值之间呈正相关性;DCT测量值在LASIK手术前后与CCT、CCV均无相关性（P〉0．05）,Pentacam的各组校正值在术前和术后均与CCT和CCV有密切的关系。结论DCT测量眼压不受CCT和CCV的影响,可作为LASIK术后眼压测量的首选方法,Pentacam系统Ehlers校正法是对LASIK术后准确测量眼压的有力补充。     

Pascal动态轮廓眼压计在角膜屈光手术前后的应用

目的 探讨Pascal动态轮廓眼压计(dynamic contour tonometer,DCT)在角膜屈光手术前后的应用.方法 随机收集我院2009年1月至6月拟接受角膜屈光手术的屈光不正患者127例(254眼),其中男51例(102眼),女76例(152眼);年龄18～47岁,平均(22.48±3.57)岁.中央角膜厚度(central corneal thickness,CCT)为450～600 μm,平均等效球镜度数为-0.75～10.00 D.术前及术后1个月分别采用DCT和非接触式眼压计(non-contact tonometer,NCT)测量眼压,角膜超声测厚仪测量CCT,并分析眼压与CCT变化的关系.结果 术前:450 μmm550 μm时,NCT测得眼压平均值分别为(11.51±3.25)mmHg(1kPa=7.5 mmHg)、(17.58±2.97)彻Hg、(19.74±3.12)nHg,DCT测得眼压平均值分别为(16.89±2.56)mmHg、(17.33±3.32)mmHg、(17.58±2.74)mmHg,当450 μm550 μm时,DCT与NCT测得的眼压平均值比较,差异均有统计学意义(均为PO.05);术后1个月:当△CCT≤50 μm、50μm<△ccT≤100μm和△cCT>looμm时,NCT测得眼压较术前分别下降(1.46±0.81)mmHg、(3.87±1.21)mmHg、(4.19±2.68)mmHg,与术前相比差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05、P0.05).结论 DCT受角膜厚度影响较小,是角膜屈光手术前后眼压测量的一种好方法,尤其对于手术前眼压偏高的患者意义更大.     

Goldmann压平眼压计与非接触式眼压计测量眼压的对比研究

目的:比较Goldmann压平眼压计(Goldmannapplanationtonometer,GAT)与非接触眼压计(non-contacttonometer,NCT)测量眼压的差异,以评价NCT与GAT测量的相关性。方法:对265例志愿者(529眼)分别采用Goldmann压平眼压计与非接触眼压计测量眼压。结果:非接触眼压计的测量结果低于Goldmann压平眼压计,且差异有显著性(19.13vs23.43,t=22.644,P<0.01),随眼压值的升高,两者相差幅度增大,差异在眼压〉30mmHg时更为明显,但相关系数逐渐变小。结论:非接触眼压计眼压测量值较Goldmann眼压测量值偏低,非接触眼压计眼压值为临界眼压时,需应用Gold-mann压平眼压计校正,以便及时发现病理性眼压升高,避免青光眼的漏诊和失治。     

Pentacam系统对LASIK手术前后眼压测量值的修正

目的评价Pentaeam三维眼前节分析诊断系统对准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术（LASIK）前后眼压测量值校正的准确性。方法将105例（208眼）拟行LASIK的患者于术前和术后12个月分别行Pentacam三维眼前节分析系统检查和Goldmann压平眼压测量,并用Pentacam系统所提供的5种校正方法对眼压测量值进行校正。结果208眼LASIK术前眼压（15．75±2．59）mmHg,术后（10．78±2．27）mmHg,术后眼压明显低于术前（P〈0．01）;在Pentacam系统校正眼压的方法中除Kohlhaas法外,均只依据角膜顶点厚度对眼压进行校正。在5种修正方法中,Ehlers、Shah和Dresden法的眼压修正值与角膜厚度成负相关;Orssengo／Pye法的校正值随角膜厚度的增减依指数曲线关系变化;Kohlhaas法依据不同的角膜厚度和角膜曲率对眼压测量值进行校正。经Pentacam系统校正后,只有Ehlers法校正的眼压术前、术后差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论Pentacam三维眼前节分析诊断系统根据角膜厚度和／或角膜曲率校正眼压测量值,LASIK术后建议使用Ehlers法对眼压测量值进行修正,有助于对可疑青光眼和眼压异常者进行判断。     

Goldmann眼压计与非接触眼压计测量青光眼患者眼压的对比分析

目的：：对比分析 Goldmann 压平式眼压计( Goldmann applanation tonometer, GAT)和非接触眼压计( non-contact tonometer,NCT)测量青光眼患者眼压的结果,寻找其规律性。方法：分别使用GAT和NCT测量108例206眼青光眼患者的眼压。结果：青光眼患者108例206眼的平均眼压：GAT测量为29.77±10.27mmHg,NCT测量为24.59±8.58mmHg,两者比较存在显著性差异(P<0.01),而且眼压越高,差异性越显著。结论：NCT 测量值较 GAT 测量值低,眼压越高,差值越大。建议使用GAT检查青光眼患者的眼压,以免漏诊和贻误治疗。     

Comparison of transpalpebral tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer

Transpalpebral tonometer, a new generation intraocular pressure (IOP) measuring instrument is nowadays used for self-tonometry. It is convenient and noninvasive and seems suitable for IOP measurement at home, as recommended by several authors. Apart from its use for self-tonometry, it has been reported that transpalpebral tonometer is more accurate in determining the IOP in thinned cornea after photorefractive procedures when compared with Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT). However, several other studies have revealed that their sensitivity in detecting IOP in glaucomatous eye is low compared with standard GAT. The aim of this study is to review the results of several studies that have compared IOP measurements obtained by the transpalpebral tonometer and GAT.     

Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry following penetrating keratoplasty

Objective: To evaluate dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) versus Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements in eyes that underwent penetrating keratoplasty (PKP).Design: Prospective, cross-sectional, observational study.Participants: Thirty-one eyes of 28 patients were examined after PKP.Methods: All eyes had undergone PKP with interrupted sutures. The postoperative period was more than 1 year for 25 eyes and less than 1 year for 6. Sutures were removed based on corneal topography and refraction. IOP was measured by both DCT and GAT methods and was correlated to the number of remaining sutures.Results: IOP readings were successfully obtained in 25/31 (80.6%) with DTC and in 21/31 (67.7%) with GAT (p = 0.25). In eyes with fewer than 4 remaining sutures, both methods were successful. In eyes with more than 4 sutures, the success rates of DCT and GAT were 66.7% and 44.4%, respectively (p = 0.18). In PKPs with a postoperative period of more than 1 year, the success rates of DCT and GAT were 96% and 84%, respectively (p = 0.16). In 20 eyes, both methods measured the IOP. The mean IOP obtained by DCT (16.6 [SD 2.8] mm Hg) was higher than the mean IOP obtained from GAT (15.1 [SD 3.6] mm Hg). The IOPs from the 2 instruments correlated significantly (p < 0.05) and the mean difference was 1.5 mm Hg.Conclusions: The success rate in measuring IOP with DCT and GAT did not show any statistically significant difference. Both methods were less effective measuring the IOP after recent PKPs and regrafts. However, DCT seemed to be superior to GAT in corneas with more than 4 remaining sutures and in PKPs performed more than 1 year earlier. The absolute values of IOP were higher with DCT than with GAT.     

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 the new rebound tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in a clinical setting

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical usefulness of a new rebound tonometer, Icare^® PRO (Icare PRO), by comparison with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) in a study on patients with glaucoma. Methods: One hundred and seventy‐two eyes of 86 subjects were enrolled in this study. All of the subjects were examined with an autorefractometer, Icare PRO, slit‐lamp biomicroscope, GAT, ultrasound A‐scan and pachymeter. Three intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements were obtained by Icare PRO and GAT. The intraobserver reliabilities were established by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficients. The Bland–Altman plot was used to compare the Icare PRO and GAT. Results: There was a good correlation between the IOP measurement by GAT and that by Icare PRO (r = 0.6995, p < 0.001). The intraclass correlation coefficients of Icare PRO and GAT were 0.778 and 0.955, respectively. The IOP differences between Icare PRO and GAT (mean: 1.92 mmHg; SD: 3.29 mmHg; 95% limit of agreement: ?4.52 to 8.37 mmHg) did not vary over the wide range of central corneal thickness (p = 0.498), age (p = 0.248), axial length (p = 0.277) or spherical equivalent (p = 0.075). Conclusions: Although IOP with Icare PRO was higher than that with GAT, especially at lower GAT IOP value, Icare PRO was found to be a reliable method and showed a good correlation with GAT. The IOP difference between Icare PRO and GAT was not affected by the central corneal thickness, age, axial length or spherical equivalent. Icare PRO can be expected not only to be a good screening tool but also to be a good substitute for GAT.     

非接触式眼压计与Goldmann压平眼压计测量眼压的比较

目的:比较非接触眼压计(non-contacttonometer,NCT)与Goldmann压平眼压计(GAT)测量眼压的差异,以评价非接触式眼压计在临床青光眼患者及疑似青光眼患者中的的应用价值。方法:志愿者174例348眼分别由专人进行非接触眼压计(NCT)与Goldmann压平眼压计眼压测量。结果:非接触眼压计(NCT)的测量结果低于Gold-mann压平眼压计且差异有显著性(19.6vs23.4,P<0.05),两者相关系数为r=0.783,差异在眼压>30mmHg组更为明显,相关系数为0.334。结论:非接触眼压计(NCT)可以用于临床普查,在青光眼的临床工作中建议使用Goldmann压平眼压计矫正。     

非接触式眼压计与Goldmann压平眼压计测量眼压的比较

目的 :比较非接触式眼压计 ( NCT)和 Goldm ann压平眼压计测量眼压的差异。方法 :对 112例 ( 2 2 0眼 )志愿者分别进行 NCT和 Goldmann压平眼压计眼压测量及中央角膜厚度测量 ,并对其中 16 8眼进行自动验光检查。结果 :NCT和 Goldmann眼压计眼压测量值分别为 1.98± 0 .6 9k Pa和 2 .34± 0 .77k Pa。 NCT眼压测量值较 Goldmann眼压测量值偏低 0 .36± 0 .37k Pa( P<0 .0 5 )。眼压在 1.33～ 2 .6 7k Pa内 ,二种眼压计测量眼压值偏差最小。角膜厚度和眼球屈光度与 NCT眼压测量值分别呈明显正相关和负相关。结论 :NCT眼压测量值较Goldmann眼压测量值偏低 ,NCT眼压值为临界眼压时 ,应应用 Goldm ann压平眼压计校正