Tono pen眼压计与Goldmann眼压计对玻璃体切割术后患者眼压测量的比较

目的比较Tono-pen眼压计与Goldmann眼压计对玻璃体切割术后患者眼压的测量结果,评价Tono-pen眼压计作为玻璃体切割术后患者眼压测量方法的可行性。方法选取经睫状体平坦部行单纯玻璃体切割及玻璃体切割合并硅油填充术的患者各60例60只眼，分别在手术后第3天用Goldmann眼压计和Tono-pen眼压计测量眼压，比较两种眼压测量值的差异。结果120只眼中，Goldmann眼压计所测量眼压的平均值为（19.72±4.62）mm Hg（1 mm Hg=0133 kPa）；Tono-pen眼压计所测眼压的平均值为（19.69±4.60）mm Hg。经统计学检验，Tono-pen眼压计与Goldmann眼压计的测量结果差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。对于8~29 mm Hg 间的眼压测量，Tono-pen眼压计与Goldmann眼压计的测量结果有高度相关性。结论对于经睫状体平坦部行单纯玻璃体切割术和合并硅油填充术的患者眼压在8~29 mm Hg 时Tono-pen眼压计可以作为一种准确测量玻璃体切割术后患者眼压的简单方法。(中华眼底病杂志,2005,21:303-305)

Comparison between the intraocular pressure values measured by Goldmann tonometer and Tono-pen tonometer in patients undergone vitrectomy

ObjectiveTo compare the results of intraocular pressure (IOP) values measured by Goldmann tonometer with which measured by Tono-pen tonometer, and to evaluate the feasibility of Tono-pen tonometer.MethodsA total of 120 patients were selected, including 60 who had undergone simple pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and the other 60 who had undergone PPV with silicon filling. IOP of all of the patients was measured by Goldmann tonometer or Tono-pen tonometer 3 days after the operation, and the results of the two measurements were compared.ResultsThe mean IOP was (19.72±4.62) mm Hgin the patients measured by Goldmann tonometer and (19.69±4.60) mm Hg in patients measured by Tono-pen tonometer. There was no statistic difference of results between the two measurements (P＞0.05). High correlation between the results of the two methods when the IOP was at 8 to 29 mm Hg was found. ConclusionsTono-pen tonometer is a simple method to measure the IOP of patients who have undergone PPV or PPV with silicon filling when their IOP is at 8 to 29 mm Hg.(Chin J Ocul Fundus Dis, 2005,21:303-305)