Intraocular Pressure and Ocular Pulse Amplitude Comparisons in Different Types of Glaucoma Using Dynamic Contour Tonometry

Punjabi, Omar S.; Ho, Hoai-Ky V; Kniestedt, Christoph; Bostrom, Alan; Stamper, Robert L.; Lin, Shan

doi:10.1080/02713680600899887

Cited by 65 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although subjects with variable lens change no matter what the acquired or senile conditions are, a clinician could consider using GAT or Tono-Pen to measure IOP. Some studies have reported a positive association between IOP and OPA 5,7,15,27 In this study, OPA correlated positively with GAT and Tono-Pen readings, but was not significantly associated with NCT or DCT. Further, larger OPA was negatively correlated with the differences between DCT and GAT readings and between NCT and GAT readings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…Regarding CCT, IOP readings using applanation tonometers usually increase with thicker CCT. 6,9,10,12 Previous reports have proposed various CCT-based correction formulas for GAT; 15,16 however, some studies suggested that the nonlinear correlation between GAT readings and CCT precludes a simple correction formula. [17][18][19] In some cases, the magnitude of change in IOP might be disproportional to ablation depth after refractive surgery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparisons of intraocular pressure measurements: Goldmann applanation tonometry, noncontact tonometry, Tono-Pen tonometry, and dynamic contour tonometry

et al. 2009

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) readings between Tono-Pen tonometry and GAT, between noncontact tonometry (NCT) and GAT, and between dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT). The correlation between IOP reading and possible confounder was identified. Methods This observational cross-sectional study enrolled sixty-two healthy subjects. All IOP and ocular pulse amplitude (OPA) measurements were taken by a single ophthalmologist; mean keratometric power (MK), central corneal thickness (CCT), and lens thickness (LT) were measured by a single experienced technician.Results Stepwise multiple regression analysis indicated that GAT (P ¼ 0.017) and DCT (P ¼ 0.002) readings correlated positively with MK; GAT, NCT, and Tono-Pen readings correlated positively with CCT (Po0.05); NCT (P ¼ 0.035), and DCT (P ¼ 0.016) readings correlated negatively with LT; GAT (P ¼ 0.006) and Tono-Pen (P ¼ 0.009) readings correlated positively with OPA. Conclusions The K, CCT, LT, and OPA are confounders in tonometry readings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparisons of intraocular pressure measurements: Goldmann applanation tonometry, noncontact tonometry, Tono-Pen tonometry, and dynamic contour tonometry

et al. 2009

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…27 This study found no proportional bias between the GAT and DCT readings. There are varied results in the literature for proportional bias; some studies have, like us, found no bias between DCT and GAT measurement, 25,28 others have found increasing differences between DCT and GAT as IOP increased, 29,30 or decreasing differences in another. 31 DCT values for IOP are similar to intracameral manometric IOP in vivo 32 and are more similar than GAT (which are significantly lower) in cadaveric eyes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Comparison of three methods of intraocular pressure measurement and their relation to central corneal thickness

Carbonaro

Andrew

Mackey

et al. 2010

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the reliability of the 'gold standard' Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), with that of the ocular response analyser (ORA), and the dynamic contour tonometer (DCT). Patients and methods A total of 694 subjects were recruited to participate from the TwinsUK (UK Adult Twin Registry) at St Thomas' Hospital, London. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured using GAT, ORA, and the DCT. The agreement between the three methods was assessed using the Bland-Altman method. Repeatability coefficients and coefficient of variation between first and second readings of the same eye were used to assess reliability. Results Mean age was 57.5 years (SD, 13.1; range, 16.1-88.5). The mean IOPs, calculated using the mean of two readings from the right eye were as follows: Goldmann (GAT), 14.1 ± 2.8 mm Hg; IOPg (ORA), 15.9 ± 3.2 mm Hg; IOPcc (ORA), 16.6 ± 3.2 mm Hg; and DCT, 16.9 ± 2.7 mm Hg. The 95% limits of agreement were for ORA (IOPcc): GAT, À2.07 to 7.18 mm Hg; for DCT: GAT, À0.49 to 6.21 mm Hg; and for DCT: ORA (IOPcc), À3.01 to 4.85 mm Hg. Coefficients of variation for the three tonometers were GAT, 8.3%; ORA, 8.2%; DCT, 6.3%. The repeatability coefficients were 3.4 mm Hg for GAT, 3.57 mm Hg for ORA and 3.09 mm Hg for DCT. GAT and ORA (IOPg) readings showed a positive correlation with central corneal thickness (Po0.005). Conclusions This study found similar reliability in all three tonometers. Bland-Altman plots showed the three instruments to have 95% limits of agreement outside the generally accepted limits, which means they are not interchangeable. GAT measurements were found to be significantly lower than the two newer instruments.

show abstract

“…Similar results, in spite of different study populations, have been reported by previous investigations. 39,40 Moreover, we evaluated the performance of DCT over a wide range of CCT and IOP values recorded in our study population. The DIOP between DCT and GAT measurements decreased with an increase in CCT (Figures 2 and 3) and IOP values (Figure 4).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in healthy and glaucomatous eyes

Ceruti

Morbio

Marraffa

et al. 2008

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare the measurements of intraocular pressure (IOP) with dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) in healthy and glaucomatous eyes and to evaluate the influence of corneal thickness (CCT), corneal curvature (CC), axial length (AL), and age on these tonometric alternatives. Methods Three hundred eyes of 100 healthy subjects, 100 patients with primary open angle glaucoma, and 100 patients with primary angle-closure glaucoma underwent IOP evaluation with DCT and GAT, and measurements of CCT, CC, and AL. Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate the agreement between tonometers. Regression analysis was used to evaluate the influence of ocular structural factors on IOP measurements obtained with both tonometers. Results Bland-Altman plots indicated that the 95% limits of agreement between tonometers were À1.4 to 6.6 mmHg. DCT values measured 2.6 ± 1.9 mmHg higher than GAT readings (Po0.001). The mean IOP difference between DCT and GAT (DIOP) was higher in healthy than in glaucomatous eyes and the magnitude of difference increased with increasing CCT. A significant reduction of DIOP with an increase in both CCT (Po0.001) and IOP values (Po0.001) was found. Regression analysis showed no effect of CC, AL, and age on both DCT and GAT readings. In contrast to GAT (Po0.001), DCT measurements were not influenced by CCT (P ¼ 0.43).Conclusions IOP readings obtained by DCT were higher and less affected by CCT than those by GAT. The DIOP was higher in healthy than in glaucomatous eyes and decreased in relation to increased CCT and IOP values.

show abstract

Intraocular Pressure and Ocular Pulse Amplitude Comparisons in Different Types of Glaucoma Using Dynamic Contour Tonometry

Cited by 65 publications

References 22 publications

Comparisons of intraocular pressure measurements: Goldmann applanation tonometry, noncontact tonometry, Tono-Pen tonometry, and dynamic contour tonometry

Comparisons of intraocular pressure measurements: Goldmann applanation tonometry, noncontact tonometry, Tono-Pen tonometry, and dynamic contour tonometry

Comparison of three methods of intraocular pressure measurement and their relation to central corneal thickness

Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in healthy and glaucomatous eyes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About