Does corneal ocular "pseudo-hypertension" exist?]

BACKGROUND: The relation between Goldmann applanation tonometry and central corneal thickness (CCT) was evaluated in several studies during the last thirty years. Patients with ocular hypertension were found to have a significantly higher CCT compared with normals and glaucomas. PATIENTS: To report on two sisters with elevated CCT and ocular hypertension diagnosed by raised intraocular-pressure (IOP) readings on Goldmann applanation tonometry. RESULTS: In both patients, there were no signs for early functional or morphological glaucomatous changes. Maximum IOP was 30 mm Hg and 26 mm Hg. The corneal pachymetry revealed an increased CCT in both patients (700 and 680 microns, respectively), while corneal morphology was normal. CONCLUSIONS: Ocular hypertension can be misdiagnosed by too high applanation tonometer readings in patients with markedly elevated CCT. Before the onset of treatment thus, corneal pachymetry should be performed in patients with ocular hypertension to exclude ocular "pseudohypertension" and to avoid unneccessary treatment.     

Diurnal variation of central corneal thickness and Goldmann applanation tonometry estimates of intraocular pressure

PURPOSE: To determine whether there is a temporal relationship between the diurnal variation of central corneal thickness (CCT) and intraocular pressure (IOP) by Goldmann applanation tonometry in young normal human participants in vivo. METHODS: Twenty-five eyes of 25 young healthy normal participants were examined in a prospective observational cross-sectional study. IOP, CCT and corneal curvature were measured using standard clinical techniques over a 24-hour period, and the temporal interrelationships between these parameters were examined. RESULTS: The overnight change in IOP measured by Goldmann tonometry was 3.1+/-2.4 mm Hg (P<0.001), CCT was 20.1+/-10.9 mum (P=0.016), with no statistical change in central corneal curvature (0.05 mm, P=0.477, paired t test with Bonferroni correction). Both IOP and CCT were highest on awakening at 7:00 then dropped rapidly to baseline levels by 9:00 (linear mixed models), and these two parameters were highly correlated (r=0.978, P<0.001). After 9:00, there was no correlation between these parameters (r=-0.453, P=0.260). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study have highlighted a potential link between the diurnal variation of CCT and the accuracy of Goldmann tonometry estimates of IOP during the first 2 hours after awakening. Clinicians should be wary of using Goldmann tonometry to estimate IOP until the overnight increase in CCT has resolved.     

Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurement: quantitative analysis

PURPOSE: To understand and quantify intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement errors introduced by corneal variables during applanation tonometry using a cornea biomechanical model. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Biomedical Engineering Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA. METHODS: The model assumed an overall resultant pressure that was based on the summation of the applanation pressure, the true IOP, and the surface tension caused by the tear film to determine the final deformation of the corneal apex during IOP measurement. Corneal resistance was varied according to the cornea's biomechanical properties, thickness, and curvature, and the effect of each variable on the accuracy of IOP tonometry readings was examined quantitatively. RESULTS: The model demonstrated that tonometry readings do not always reflect true IOP values. They deviate when corneal thickness, curvature, or biomechanical properties vary from normal values. Based on the model, predicted IOP readings have a 2.87 mm Hg range resulting from the variation in the corneal thickness in the normal population and a 1.76 mm Hg range from the variation in the corneal radius of curvature. Considering that Young's modulus of the corneal varies from 0.1 to 0.9 MPa in the normal population, the model predicts tonometry IOP readings will have a range of 17.26 mm Hg because of the variation in this corneal biomechanical parameter alone. CONCLUSIONS: The simulation based on the model demonstrated quantitatively that variations in each corneal variable cause errors in tonometry IOP readings. The simulation results indicate that differences in corneal biomechanics across individuals may have greater impact on IOP measurement errors than corneal thickness or curvature.     

Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with goldman applanation tonometry over a wide range of central corneal thickness

PURPOSE: To compare dynamic contour tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry in structurally normal corneas over a wide range of central corneal thickness (CCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients each with normal CCT (group A), thin corneas (group B), and thick corneas (group C) had IOP measured with the Goldmann (GAT) and dynamic contour tonometer (DCT). RESULTS: In group A (mean CCT = 552 +/- 16 microm) the mean GAT was 15.9 +/- 3.1 mm Hg and mean DCT was 16 +/- 3.3 mm Hg (P = 0.91). In group B (mean CCT = 491 +/- 19 microm) the mean GAT was 13.2 +/- 3.5 mm Hg and the mean DCT was 15.9 +/- 3.5 mm Hg (P = 0.009). For group C (mean CCT = 615 +/- 22 microm), the mean GAT was 17.4 +/- 3.8 mm Hg and the mean DCT was 17.4 +/- 3.5 mm Hg (P = 0.95). The 95% agreement limits for DCT were -3.1 mm Hg to 2.9 mm Hg. The mean GAT-DCT difference was -2.6 mm Hg in thin corneas and -0.06 mm Hg in thick corneas. Below 520 microm reduction of 10 microm in CCT appears to result in a significant underestimation of the GAT IOP by 0.7 mm Hg (P < .001) and above 580 microm a non-significant overestimation of 0.2 mm Hg per 10 microm increase in CCT (P = 0.27). CONCLUSION: Dynamic contour tonometer agrees well on average with GAT but the agreement limits are wide. In structurally normal thin corneas DCT may give a more accurate assessment of the true IOP but it does not appear to have any benefit over GAT in thick corneas.     

Clinical comparison of the ProTon and Tono-Pen tonometers with the Goldmann applanation tonometer.

A clinical evaluation of a new electron ProTon tonometer was performed comparing the values of intraocular pressure (IOP) measured using this instrument with those determined by a similar instrument, Tono-Pen XL, and by Goldmann applanation tonometry. The mean IOP measured in 106 eyes with the ProTon tonometer was not significantly different from that determined with Goldmann applanation, while the IOP values measured with Tono-Pen XL were significantly lower. The 95% limits of agreement between applanation tonometry and ProTon tonometry were between -4 mm Hg and 5 mm Hg and between applanation tonometry and Tono-Pen XL tonometry between -3 mm Hg and 8 mm Hg. The ProTon tonometer appears to have a higher level of accuracy than the Tono-Pen XL tonometer in clinical practice.     

Corneal hysteresis and intraocular pressure measurement in children using the reichert ocular response analyzer

PURPOSE: To examine corneal hysteresis in children with normal eyes and congenital glaucoma and assess intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement with the Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer (RORA). DESIGN: Observational, cross-sectional study. METHODS: setting: Clinical practice. patients: Corneal hysteresis and intraocular pressure (Goldmann correlated [IOPg] and corneal compensated [IOPcc]) were recorded with RORA. IOP was also measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry. RESULTS: Mean corneal hysteresis of 12.5 mm Hg was recorded in 81 [corrected] normal eyes of 42 children. It was markedly lower (mean 6.3 mm Hg) in 11 eyes of eight children with congenital glaucoma. No correlation was found between age and corneal hysteresis (r = -0.08). IOPg did not differ significantly from Goldmann applanation tonometry (P = .27). IOPcc was statistically significantly greater than IOPg (P = .014). RORA measurement was not possible in the presence of nystagmus but was possible with applanation tonometry. Cooperation with IOP measurement was much higher with RORA (89.8%) compared with applanation tonometry (78.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Corneal hysteresis in children is similar to that reported in adults. No correlation was found with age. In the presence of nystagmus, IOP measurement was possible with Goldmann applanation tonometry but not RORA. Cooperation with IOP measurement was better with RORA than with Goldmann applanation tonometry.     

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.     

Intraocular pressure measurement-comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and goldmann applanation tonometry

PURPOSE: The dynamic contour tonometer (DCT, Pascal tonometer, Swiss Microtechnology AG, Port, Switzerland) was recently introduced as a new method of intraocular pressure measurement, supposedly independent of corneal properties. In this study we analyzed the agreement and correlation of dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and investigated the influence of central corneal thickness (CCT) and corneal curvature. We also considered preferential patient groups for both methods. METHODS: In a prospective study of 100 eyes without glaucoma, intraocular pressure was measured using dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry, followed by measurements of central corneal thickness and corneal curvature. RESULTS: A clear correlation between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry was found (r = 0.693; P < 0.001). Dynamic contour tonometry generally resulted in higher intraocular pressure measurements (median difference + 1.8 mm Hg, mean difference + 2.34 mm Hg). Unlike dynamic contour tonometry, Goldmann applanation tonometry was remarkably affected by central corneal thickness, but neither method was significantly influenced by corneal curvature. Bland-Altman graphs showed remarkable disagreement between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry, which could be partially explained by the influence of central corneal thickness on Goldmann applanation tonometry. To obtain valid readings, dynamic contour tonometry required a more extensive selection of patients than Goldmann applanation tonometry. CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic contour tonometry seems to be a reliable method for intraocular pressure measurement, which unlike Goldmann applanation tonometry is not influenced by central corneal thickness. In clinical practice, advantages from dynamic contour tonometry can be expected for cooperative patients, outpatients, and patients with sufficient bilateral ocular fixation, whereas Goldmann applanation tonometry measurements are more reliable in case of patients with inadequate cooperation, poor vision, or nystagmus.     

The effect of corneal thickness on intraocular pressure measurement in patients with corneal pathology

BACKGROUND/AIM: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements taken by the Goldmann applanation tonometer, the Tono-Pen and the ocular blood flow pneumotonometer in eyes with varying central corneal thickness (CCT) due to penetrating keratoplasty (PK), keratoconus (KC), and Fuchs' endothelial dystrophy (FED). METHODS: IOP was measured with the Goldmann applanation tonometer, Tono-Pen XL, and OBF pneumotonometer in 127 eyes with the following corneal abnormalities. There were 56 eyes that had undergone PK, 37 eyes with KC, and 34 eyes with FED. CCT was measured using an ultrasound pachymeter after IOP determinations had been made. RESULTS: Mean IOP measurements in all three patient groups were significantly higher when measured by OBF pneumotonometer. Linear regression analysis showed that patients with FED had a significant increase in IOP with increasing CCT of 0.18 mm Hg/10 microm using the Goldmann tonometer, 0.15 mm Hg/10 microm with the Tono-Pen, and 0.26 mm Hg/10 microm with the OBF pneumotonometer. In patients with KC and after PK, linear regression analysis did not show a significant effect of CCT on IOP. A multivariate linear regression model controlling for age, sex, graft size, and patient group, showed that the effect of CCT on IOP for Tono-Pen (0.13 mm Hg/10 microm CCT) and Goldmann (0.14 mm Hg/10 microm CCT) were significantly lower than for the OBF pneumotonometer (0.26 mm Hg/10 microm CCT). CONCLUSIONS: This study found that mean IOP measurements using the OBF pneumotonometer were significantly higher than those made using the Goldmann applanation tonometer or Tono-Pen in eyes with a variety of cornel pathologies. The OBF pneumotonometer was found to be most affected by variation in CCT. For all three instruments, the relation between IOP and CCT depended on the corneal pathology and was greatest for FED.     

The effect of contact lens induced corneal edema on Goldmann applanation tonometry measurements

AIM: To determine the effect of small increases in corneal hydration on the accuracy of Goldmann applanation tonometry estimates of intraocular pressure (IOP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five young healthy subjects presented on 3 separate days approximately 1 week apart. On 2 visits, subjects were required to wear a hydrogel contact lens with either a center thickness of 0.3 and 0.7 mm (HEMA 38% water content, parallel surface curve) in 1 eye only under closed-eye conditions for 2 hours to induce corneal swelling. The third visit acted as a control. IOP, corneal thickness, and corneal curvature were measured in both eyes before and after contact lens wear on all visits. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant increase in corneal thickness of 40.2+/-14.4 microm (P<0.001) and 41.9+/-16.4 microm (P<0.001) after wearing the 0.3 and 0.7 mm thick contact lenses, respectively (2-tailed paired t test). There was an increase in IOP of 2.8+/-2.2 mm Hg (P<0.001) after wearing the 0.3 mm thick contact lens, and a statistically insignificant difference of 1.3+/-3.0 mm Hg (P=0.058) after wearing the 0.7 mm thick contact lens (2-tailed paired t test). There was a statistically significant Pearson correlation between the change in corneal thickness and the change in IOP after lens wear (r=0.500, P<0.001, 0.3 mm lens and r=0.399, P<0.001, 0.7 mm lens). The corneal hydration-induced measurement error was 0.46 mm Hg per 10 microm change in corneal thickness (0.3 mm lens) and 0.35 mm Hg per 10 microm change in corneal thickness (0.7 mm lens). CONCLUSION: A small increase in corneal hydration and thickness may cause a clinically significant overestimation of IOP when measured using Goldmann applanation tonometry.     

Tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis treatment

PURPOSE: To assess the reliability of intraocular pressure measurements by Goldmann applanation tonometry versus pneumotonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective study, corneal Goldmann applanation tonometry and pneumotonometry measurements were made in 118 eyes of 60 patients before and 1 and 3 months after undergoing laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia. Manifest refraction, ultrasonic corneal thickness measurements, and keratometry readings were also obtained. RESULTS: Preoperative intraocular pressure showed a good correlation between Goldmann applanation tonometry and pneumotonometry values (Pearson r = 0.71; P < 0.001). although Goldmann applanation tonometry readings were slightly higher at low intraocular pressure values and slightly lower at high intraocular pressure values. After a mean stromal ablation depth of 77.1 microm, mean intraocular pressure by Goldmann applanation tonometry decreased significantly (P < 0.001) from a preoperative value of 14.8 +/- 11.9 mm Hg to 11.9 +/- 2.1 mm Hg and 11.7 +/- 1.7 mm Hg after 1 and 3 months, respectively. Mean pre- and post-laser in situ keratomileusis measurements by pneumotonometry were similar (P = 0.8). Differences of postoperative intraocular pressure measurements by Goldmann applanation tonometry and pneumotonometry were statistically significant. After 3 months, there was a poor correlation between Goldmann applanation tonometry and pneumotonometry intraocular pressure values (Pearson r = 0.58). Postoperative intraocular pressure decrease in applanation tonometry correlated with changes in keratometry, spherical equivalent, and central corneal thickness. Regression analysis showed a decrease of 2.9 mm Hg per 70 microm reduction in central corneal thickness. CONCLUSIONS: Contact pneumotonometry measures the IOP reliably after laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia, whereas Goldmann applanation tonometry underestimates the intraocular pressure. This may be important in the treatment of any future glaucoma.     

Should Orbscan pachometry be performed before or after Goldmann applanation tonometry?

PURPOSE: To compare the Orbscan central corneal thickness (CCT) values before and after intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement with Goldmann applanation tonometry in young normal adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-three eyes of 53 subjects who were free from any ocular problems were studied. The measurements included optical pachometry by the Orbscan II system, followed by Goldmann applanation tonometry, and finally Orbscan optical pachometry again. Standard Goldmann technique was adopted with the application of one drop of 0.4% benoxinate and fluorescein sodium prior to the measurement. The same operator was involved in the Orbscan pachometry before and after Goldmann tonometry. Another investigator was responsible for Goldmann tonometry. Three readings were obtained in each case, and the means were used for analysis. RESULTS: The mean IOP of the sample was 14.6 +/- 2.6 mmHg. There was no significant difference (paired t-test: p = 0.50) in the mean CCT values before and after the Goldmann tonometry (551 +/- 32 and 552 +/- 35 microm respectively). CONCLUSION: Standard Goldmann applanation tonometry does not affect the Orbscan CCT values. Measurement of CCT for the adjustment of true IOP can be carried out either before or after Goldmann tonometry.     

兔眼中央角膜厚度与Perkins压平眼压关系的研究

目的探讨中央角膜厚度(CCT)与Perkins压平眼压的关系,建立CCT、真实眼压与Perkins压平眼压三者关系的数学模型和CCT对Perkins压平眼压的校正公式。方法健康新西兰大耳白兔32只,双眼中1只眼行准分子激光屈光性角膜切削术(PRK),另1只眼测得的数据对行PRK眼得出的数据进行验证。采用随机数字表法随机取1只眼,采用PRK,人为改变兔眼的CCT,建立不同CCT的活体眼模型,分别采用Perkins压平眼压计、A型超声角膜测厚仪、角膜曲率计测量术前、术后Perkins压平眼压、CCT、角膜曲率以及应用电子直接眼压计测量真实眼压,分别对术前和术后测量值做相关分析和多元线性回归分析,并对另1组未行PRK眼测得的真实眼压、Perkins压平眼压、CCT对实验组得出的公式进行验证。结果兔眼双眼Perkins压平眼压、CCT、角膜曲率无统计学差别,无论是术前还是术后Perkins压平眼压与CCT均显著相关(r=0.761P<0.01;r=0.829,P<0.01),与角膜曲率无关(r=0.098,P>0.05;r=0.260P>0.05)。对术前、术后Perkins压平眼压与CCT建立回归公式,曲线的斜率分别为0.066、0.053,Perkins压平眼压的改变与CCT的改变有关。对真实眼压Y与Perkins压平眼压、CCT三者的关系建立回归公式为Y=12.107+1.254X1-0.033X2(X1=Perkins压平眼压,X2=CCT)。结论CCT的改变影响Perkins压平眼压的测量值,临床上应根据CCT来校正Perkins压平眼压的测量值。     

Measurement of intraocular pressure in LASIK and LASEK patients using the Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer and Goldmann applanation tonometry

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of the Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) to measure intraocular pressure (IOP) following corneal laser refractive surgery. METHODS: Intraocular pressure was measured using Goldmann applanation tonometry preoperatively and 3 months following LASIK and LASEK for all levels of myopia and low levels of hyperopia. In LASIK eyes, 120-microm flaps were cut using the Hansatome XP. The ORA was used to measure Goldmann correlated IOP and corneal compensated IOP 3 months postoperatively. Postoperative central corneal thickness, hysteresis, and corneal curvature were assessed to determine their relationship with postoperative change in Goldmann applanation tonometry IOP. Efficacy of ORA IOP measurement was analyzed by comparing Goldmann applanation tonometry IOP with Goldmann correlated IOP. RESULTS: LASEK was performed on 35 eyes, and LASIK was performed on 90 eyes. In the LASIK group, mean Goldmann applanation tonometry IOP decreased 3.7+/-2.3 mmHg postoperatively (P=.00). Postoperative Goldmann applanation tonometry did not differ significantly (P=.06) from postoperative ORA Goldmann correlated IOP (10.2+/-2.1 mmHg). In the LASEK group, mean Goldmann applanation tonometry IOP decreased 3.9+/-2.3 mmHg (P=.00). Postoperative Goldmann applanation tonometry did not differ significantly (P=.6) from postoperative ORA Goldmann correlated IOP (10.7+/-2.5 mmHg). Postoperative decrease in Goldmann applanation tonometry IOP did not correlate with age, ablation depth, pre- and postoperative central corneal thickness or corneal hysteresis, or postoperative decrease in corneal curvature. CONCLUSIONS: Intraocular pressure measurements were similar using both the ORA Goldmann correlated IOP and Goldmann applanation tonometry following keratorefractive surgery.     

ProTon tonometer determination of intraocular pressure in patients with scarred corneas

PURPOSE: To evaluate the measure of intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with scarred corneas obtained from the affected and non-affected areas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen patients with small maculo-leucomatous corneal opacity following microbial keratitis were prospectively included in the study. Goldmann applanation tonometry was done first on the non-affected corneal surface. ProTon tonometry (PT) was then carried out on the same eye, to obtain IOP measurements from the non-affected (PT1) and the affected area (PT2) of the cornea. The IOP measurements were compared using a two-tail paired t test. RESULTS: The mean of IOP measurements of PT 2 and PT1 was 22 mm of Hg (SD +/- 5.2) and 14.8 mm of Hg (SD +/- 5.4), respectively. The higher reading of PT2 was statistically significant ( P < 0.001). The mean Goldmann applanation tonometry was 14.6 mm of Hg (SD 5.4) and it did not differ significantly ( P = 0.86) from the PT1 readings of 14.8 mm of Hg (SD 5.4). CONCLUSION: In patients with maculo-leucomatous corneal opacity, determination of IOP by ProTon tonometer varies from the affected to the non-affected area. The ProTon tonometer overestimates the level of IOP when it is applied to a leucomatous corneal opacity.     

Agreement of iCare IC200 tonometry with Perkins applanation tonometry in healthy children

PurposeTo assess interdevice agreement between the iCare IC200 rebound tonometer and Perkins applanation tonometry (gold standard) in a healthy pediatric population.MethodsA total of 42 eyes of 42 healthy children were assessed using both tonometers. Data was collected on subject’s age, sex, best-corrected visual acuity, and central corneal thickness (CCT). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman analyses were used to determine agreement between IC200 and Perkins applanation tonometers. Linear regression analyzed the effects of intraocular pressure (IOP) on device difference.ResultsThe mean age and standard deviation of healthy pediatric subjects was 10.0 ± 3.3 years. The mean difference between IC200 and Perkins tonometers (IC200-Perkins) was 0.72 mm Hg, with a mean of 17.1 ± 3.0 mm Hg and 16.4 ± 2.5 mm Hg, respectively. The absolute agreement, or ICC, between tonometers was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.56-0.70). Bland-Altman analysis showed 95% limits of agreement ranging from ?5.2 to +6.6 mm Hg. CCT was not correlated with IOP for either the IC200 (P = 0.35) or the Perkins tonometer (P = 0.052).ConclusionsCompared to applanation tonometry, IC200 overestimated IOP in healthy children, with a greater frequency of readings > +2 mm Hg than < ?2 mm Hg compared to Perkins. There was moderate agreement between tonometers. CCT was not found to influence IOP measurement for either tonometer.     

Reproducibility and clinical evaluation of rebound tonometry

PURPOSE: To establish the reproducibility of a rebound tonometer in humans and the effect of corneal thickness on measurements, comparing it with Goldmann applanation tonometer. METHODS: In a first study designed to examine the reliability of the RBT, three experienced ophthalmologists undertook three consecutive intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements in 12 eyes of 12 normal subjects. A cross-sectional study was then performed to compare measurements obtained using the two tonometers in 147 eyes of 85 patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma. RESULTS: Intraobserver coefficients of correlation obtained in the reproducibility study were 0.82, 0.73, and 0.87. Interobserver correlation was 0.82. There was a good correlation between IOP readings obtained by the RBT and the GAT (r = 0.865, P < 0.0001). RBT readings were consistently higher than GAT measurements (median difference, 1.8 +/- 2.8 mm Hg). A Bland-Altman plot indicated the 95% limits of agreement between the two methods were -3.7 to 7.3 mm Hg (slope = -0.022, P = 0.618). Using RBT, the point that best discriminated between patients with an IOP < or = 21 mm Hg and those with >21 mm Hg, as determined by the GAT was >23 mm Hg (sensitivity, 70.5%; specificity, 95.1%). In terms of pachymetry, the two tonometers behaved in a similar way, with correlation observed between IOP measurements and central corneal thickness. CONCLUSIONS: Rebound tonometry is a reproducible method of determining IOP in humans. In general, it tends to overestimate IOP compared with Goldmann applanation tonometry. The tonometers used in both methods are similarly affected by pachymetry.     

Effect of corneal thickness on intraocular pressure measurements with the pneumotonometer, Goldmann applanation tonometer, and Tono-Pen

PURPOSE: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements of the Ocular Blood Flow (OBF) pneumotonometer, Goldmann applanation tonometer, and Tono-Pen in eyes with normal corneas of various thicknesses. METHODS: IOP was measured with an OBF pneumotonometer, Tono-Pen and Goldmann applanation tonometer in random order in 181 eyes with normal corneas. Central corneal thickness (CCT) was measured using an ultrasonic pachymeter after all IOP determinations had been made. Right and left eyes were analyzed separately for statistical purposes. RESULTS: With all instruments, IOP varied with CCT, even though the variation in IOP was large. Readings with the OBF pneumotonometer showed a mean increase in IOP with increasing CCT of 0.28 mm Hg/10 microm, an increase of 0.23 mm Hg/10 microm with the Goldmann tonometer, and of 0.10 mm Hg/10 microm with the Tono-Pen. The OBF pneumotonometer consistently recorded comparatively higher IOPs than the other two instruments. CONCLUSIONS: The Tono-Pen is least affected by CCT when used to measure IOP in eyes with normal corneas. The OBF pneumotonometer appears to be more affected by variation in CCT than the Goldmann tonometer. This is contrary to expectations, based on the mechanism of measurement of IOP of the OBF pneumotonometer.     

Intraocular pressure measurement after hyperopic LASIK.

PURPOSE: Previous studies have shown that Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) underestimates intraocular pressure (IOP) following photorefractive keratometry (PRK) and myopic laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability of intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements by Goldmann applanation tonometry and pneumotonometry (PT) after hyperopic LASIK. METHODS: The IOPs of 20 eyes of 15 patients who underwent hyperopia LASIK were prospectively evaluated. Central and peripheral IOP were measured with GAT and PT, and central and peripheral corneal thicknesses were measured with ultrasonographic pachymetry. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and at 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Postoperative GAT measurements of IOP made from the central (13.1+/-2.7 mm Hg) and peripheral (13.9+/-3.3 mm Hg) corneal areas were significantly lower (P <0.001) than central IOP measured preoperatively (17.0+/-2.5 mm Hg). Postoperative PT measurements from the central (17.4+/-3.2 mm Hg) and peripheral (17.6+/-2.9 mm Hg) corneal areas were slightly lower than preoperative central IOP (18.4+/-2.4 mm Hg), but not statistically significant. There were no significant differences between central and peripheral IOP measurements using either method. CONCLUSION: The data demonstrate that GAT may underestimate IOP measurement, following hyperopic LASIK.     

Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and goldmann applanation tonometry in deep lamellar and penetrating keratoplasties

PURPOSE: To compare the measurements of intraocular pressure (IOP) with dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) in eyes with corneal graft and to evaluate the influence of corneal thickness (CCT), corneal curvature (CC), and astigmatism on these methods. DESIGN: Prospective, observational cross-sectional study. METHODS: Eighteen eyes of 18 patients after penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) and 14 eyes of 14 patients after deep lamellar keratoplasty (DLKP) underwent IOP evaluation with DCT and GAT, and measurements of CCT, CC, and astigmatism. Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate the agreement between tonometers. Multivariate regression analysis was used to evaluate the influence of ocular structural factors and running suture on IOP measurements obtained with both tonometers. RESULTS: IOP values obtained by DCT and GAT were strongly correlated in all eyes (r = .91; P < .001). DCT values measured 2.5 +/- 1.7 mm Hg higher than GAT readings (P < .001). A reduction of the mean IOP difference between DCT and GAT with an increase in IOP values (P < .001) was found. Regression analysis showed no effect of CCT, CC, astigmatism, and running suture on both DCT and GAT readings, either in DLKP or in PKP eyes. CONCLUSIONS: We found a good overall correlation between both tonometers but the agreement between instruments differs in high or low IOP ranges. The wide and varying 95% limits of agreement between DCT and GAT indicates that DCT provides IOP measurements on deep lamellar and penetrating keratoplasties which can be used in the clinical practice.