回弹式眼压计与非接触眼压计测量眼压结果比较

目的 比较应用爱科回弹式眼压计(iCare Rebound Tonometer,RBT)与非接触眼压计(non-contact tonometer,NCT)测量正常人群眼压结果的差异,并讨论RBT在眼科临床中的应用.方法 对131例(262只眼)分别用RBT和NCT在同一体位进行眼内压(intraocular pressure,IOP)的测量,对所得数据进行配对t检验及相关性分析.结果 NCT所测眼压平均值为(13.69±6.01)mmHg,RBT所测眼压平均值为(14.05±4.09)mmHg,NCT和RBT测得的眼压值无显著差异(P=0.23),两种眼压测量方式具有良好的相关性(相关系数0.56).结论 在进行正常人群高眼压筛选中,RBT和NCT测得眼压值无显著差异,有良好的相关性,RBT在进行青光眼的初步筛选中比NCT更为方便、快捷,值得推广.     

Deviations between transpalpebral tonometry using TGDc-01 and Goldmann applanation tonometry depending on the IOP level

Background Recent comparisons between transpalpebral tonometry using TGDc-01 and Goldmann applanation tonometry were performed in populations with IOPs between 10 and 20 mmHg. The purpose of this study was to evaluate device deviations depending on different IOP levels (range 5–40 mmHg).Methods A total of 68 eyes of 68 patients were included and assigned to four IOP levels according to an initial applanation tonometry assessment: level I, <10 mmHg (n=8); level II, 10–19 mmHg (n=20); level III, 20–29 mmHg (n=20); and level IV, 30 mmHg (n=20). Two independent and randomized observers performed three replicate measurements per eye—observer 1 using TGDc-01 tonometry, and observer 2 using Goldmann applanation tonometry. Intraindividual deviations between measurement results were investigated concerning clinical relevance by medians and quartiles, concerning statistical significance by pairwise sign tests; p values <0.05 indicate local statistical significance.Results In patients with initial IOP 20 mmHg, TGDc-01–based tonometry significantly underestimated the IOP as based on Goldmann applanation tonometry (p<0.001). This effect increased with increasing IOP: IOP level III median difference (TGDc-01 – Goldmann) –1.3 mmHg (interquartile range, –2.5, –0.4), IOP level IV median difference –2.7 mmHg (–3.7, –1.0). In patients with initial IOP <10 mmHg, an at least gradual underestimation by TGDc-01 tonometry (p=0.219; median difference, –0.6, –1.6, 0) was observed. A total 18% of patients showed device deviations >±3 mmHg, and even 35% of those patients with initial IOP 30 mmHg.Conclusions TGDc-01–based tonometry demonstrated an increasing underestimation of IOP with increasing IOP levels when compared with the current standard method of Goldmann applanation tonometry.     

Comparison of the iCare rebound tonometer and the Goldmann applanation tonometer over a wide IOP range

Background The aim of this study was to compare the intraocular pressure (IOP) results measured by the iCare rebound tonometer with those obtained by the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) over a wide range of IOP values. Furthermore, the comfort level of the iCare measurement was evaluated. Method The study included 75 eyes of 75 patients. The patients were divided into three groups (7–15 mmHg n = 25, 16–22 mmHg n = 25, 23–60 mmHg n = 25). The measurements were taken by two independent observers in a masked fashion. All patients were asked about discomfort during the iCare measurement. To establish the agreement between the two devices, a Bland-Altman analysis was performed. Results Overall, the 95% confidence interval of the differences between the two devices was −8.67 to 10.25 mmHg and in 62.7%, the iCare measurement was within ±3 mmHg of the GAT measurements. The distribution of the differences in IOP was similar, from 7–22 mmHg. In the higher IOP range (23–60 mmHg), however, the deviation was almost twice as large. The measurement with the iCare tonometer was well tolerated; 100% of the patients denied any discomfort. Conclusions The iCare tonometer is a mobile alternative to GAT in a low to moderate IOP range, but our findings show a greater deviation than previously reported. In high IOP values, measurements with the iCare tonometer do not correlate well with GAT.     

Comparison of ICare and IOPen vs Goldmann applanation tonometry according to international standards 8612 in glaucoma patients

AIM: To compare IOPen and ICare rebound tonometry to Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) according to International Standards Organization (ISO) 8612 criteria. METHODS: Totally 191 eyes (n=107 individuals) were included. Criteria of ISO 8612 were fulfilled: 3 clusters of IOP, measured by GAT, were formed. The GAT results were given as mean±standard deviation. RESULTS: GAT (19.7±0.5 mm Hg) showed a significant correlation to ICare (19.8±0.5 mm Hg) (r=0.547, P<0.001) and IOPen (19.5±0.5 mm Hg) (r=0.526, P<0.001). According to ISO 8612 criteria in all 3 IOP groups the number of outliers (of the 95% limits of agreement) exceeded 5% for ICare and IOPen vs GAT: No.1 (n=68) 29.4% and 22.1%, No.2 (n=62) 35.5% and 37.1%, No.3 (n=61) 26.2% and 42.6%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The strict requirements of the ISO 8612 are not fulfilled in a glaucoma collective by ICare and IOPen at present. As long as the Goldmann tonometry is applicable it should be used first of all for reproducible IOP readings. ICare and IOPen tonometry should be considered as an alternative tool, if application of Goldmann tonometry is not possible.     

Comparison of the IOPen® and iCare® rebound tonometers with the Goldmann tonometer in a normal population

This study proposes to evaluate the level of accuracy of intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements of a second generation rebound tonometer (IOPen^®), taking as references the Goldmann Applanation Tonometer (GAT) and the iCare^® rebound tonometer. The right eyes of 101 consecutive clinical patients were assessed with the three tonometers. The IOPen^® and iCare^® measurements were taken by two different optometrists and the GAT by an ophthalmologist. In this study, statistically significant differences were found when comparing the IOPen^® tonometer with the other two tonometers ( p  <   0.001). The IOPen^® underestimated the IOP value when compared to the GAT and the iCare^® (mean differences were 2.94 ± 4.65 mmHg and 3.20 ± 4.72 mmHg (mean ± S.D.), respectively). The frequency distribution of differences demonstrated that in more than 55% of measurements the IOP readings differed by more than 3 mmHg between the IOPen^® and the GAT. Based on the present population study, these results suggest that IOPen^® measurements should be interpreted with caution.     

Effects of central corneal thickness and corneal curvature on the intraocular pressure measurement by Goldmann applanation tonometer and ocular blood flow pneumatonometer

PURPOSE: To assess the effects of central corneal thickness (CCT) and corneal curvature (CC) on the measurements of intraocular pressure (IOP) using Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) and the ocular blood flow pneumatonometer (OBFT). METHODS: 104 patients were recruited from a glaucoma clinic. The CCT was measured using ultrasound pachymetry and the mean radius of CC using a keratometer. The IOP of each eye was measured using both GAT and the OBFT in a random order. Right eyes only were analysed for statistical purposes. RESULTS: The mean (+/-SD) IOP by GAT and OBFT was 18.2 mmHg (+/-4.4) and 18.2 mmHg (+/-4.0), respectively, with no statistically significant difference. IOP measurement with both instruments varied with CCT and CC. GAT showed an IOP increase of 0.40 mmHg per 10 microm increase of CCT and OBFT showed an increase of 0.38 mmHg in IOP per 10 microm increase of CCT. Multiple regression analysis showed that the effect of CCT was statistically significant (P<0.001) on IOP recorded by both the GAT and OBFT but CC did not have a statistically significant effect on IOP recordings performed by either technique. CONCLUSION: IOP measurements by GAT and OBFT are positively correlated with CCT with both tonometers being similarly affected. There was no significant correlation between CC and IOP measured by either tonometer.     

Evaluation of retinal microvasculature according to stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease severity and the correlation of pulmonary parameters with optical coherence tomography angiography findings

Purpose:To evaluate the retinal and optic disc microvascular changes according to disease severity in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and the correlation of pulmonary parameters with optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) findings.Methods:Forty patients with COPD and 30 age- and sex-matched subjects (control group) were included in this cross-sectional prospective study. The COPD group was then divided into two subgroups according to GOLD classification and disease severity as mild-to-moderate COPD group (group 1) and severe COPD group (group 2). OCTA was performed with 6 mm × 6 mm sections for the macula and 4.5 mm × 4.5 mm sections for the optic disc. Foveal retinal thickness (FRT), peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness, and vessel density in different sections of the retina and optic disc were analyzed.Results:The mean ages, gender, intraocular pressures, peripapillary RNFL thickness, FRT, and optic disc vessel densities were similar among the groups. Compared to the control group and group 1, group 2 showed significantly lower mean foveal vessel density measurements in superficial and deep capillary plexus (P = 0.014 and P = 0.007, respectively). Cigarette packets/year, exacerbation per year, and Modified Medical Research Council showed significant negative correlations, whereas forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and FEV1/forced vital capacity showed significant positive correlations with foveal vessel densities.Conclusion:COPD severity seems to have a negative effect on OCTA measurements. OCTA may reflect the severity of inflammation and hypoxia in COPD and may provide useful detailed information on the role of retinal vascular changes in the follow-up and progression of patients with COPD.