A comparison between Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry after photorefractive keratectomy
Background The intraocular pressure (IOP) could be measured by both Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and dynamic contour tonometry (DCT). Although these two methods have been discussed widely after laser-assisted sub-epithelial keratectomy (LASIK), there is little data in the cases undergoing ph...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology 2013-02, Vol.251 (2), p.603-608 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 608 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 603 |
| container_title | Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology |
| container_volume | 251 |
| creator | Sadigh, Afshin Lotfi Fouladi, Rohollah F. Hashemi, Hassan Beheshtnejad, Amir Houshang |
| description | Background
The intraocular pressure (IOP) could be measured by both Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and dynamic contour tonometry (DCT). Although these two methods have been discussed widely after laser-assisted sub-epithelial keratectomy (LASIK), there is little data in the cases undergoing photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). We aimed to compare the changes of IOP measurements obtained by GAT and DCT after PRK for myopia/myopic astigmatism.
Methods
This prospective study enrolled 77 candidates (154 eyes) for PRK to correct myopia or myopic astigmatism and 30 matched patients (30 eyes) with myopia or myopic astigmatism who served as controls. Changes of the IOP measurements (ΔIOP) obtained by GAT and DCT before and at 6 months after PRK in the operated eyes, and at baseline and 6 months later in the controls, were documented. Changes of the central corneal thickness (ΔCCT) were determined in the same fashion.
Results
The mean IOP readings obtained by DCT were comparable before and at 6 months after procedure (18.34 ± 3.03 mmHg and 17.87 ± 2.61 mmHg respectively,
p
= 0.41); whereas the mean IOP reading obtained by GAT decreased significantly 6 months postoperatively (17.92 ± 3.63 mmHg and 16.25 ± 2.66 mmHg,
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00417-012-2142-1 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1285080655</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2883804141</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-ed6f37a84862e55fe06bcb2feb85470eff33c8c00368533b1058607c0b2a86fd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU9LHTEUxYMo9VX7AdyUgW66mXqTTP68pYi1gtCNgruQydzYsW-SaZKnvG9vHs-KCK6yOL9zbg6HkBMKPyiAOs0AHVUtUNYy2rGW7pEF7bhoFbC7fbIAxWirObs7JJ9zfoCKc0E_kUPGlh2opVyQfNa4OM02jTmGpsfyhBiay7gaJhtCY-d5ZYMtYxVLDHHCkjaNDUMzbIKdRlfdocR1eqv6gqmZ_8QSE_pkXRkfsfmLyRZ0JU6bY3Lg7Srjl5f3iNz-vLg5_9Ve_768Oj-7bh1XrLQ4SM-V1Z2WDIXwCLJ3PfPYa9EpQO85d9oBcKkF5z0FoSUoBz2zWvqBH5Hvu9w5xX9rzMVMY3a4qo0wrrOhTAvQIIWo6Ld36EMtFervtlTHpF4uaaXojnIp5lzLmTmNk00bQ8FsFzG7RUxdxGwXMVvP15fkdT_h8Or4P0EF2A7IVQr3mN6c_jD1GetWmI4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1284268991</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparison between Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry after photorefractive keratectomy</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Sadigh, Afshin Lotfi ; Fouladi, Rohollah F. ; Hashemi, Hassan ; Beheshtnejad, Amir Houshang</creator><creatorcontrib>Sadigh, Afshin Lotfi ; Fouladi, Rohollah F. ; Hashemi, Hassan ; Beheshtnejad, Amir Houshang</creatorcontrib><description>Background
The intraocular pressure (IOP) could be measured by both Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and dynamic contour tonometry (DCT). Although these two methods have been discussed widely after laser-assisted sub-epithelial keratectomy (LASIK), there is little data in the cases undergoing photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). We aimed to compare the changes of IOP measurements obtained by GAT and DCT after PRK for myopia/myopic astigmatism.
Methods
This prospective study enrolled 77 candidates (154 eyes) for PRK to correct myopia or myopic astigmatism and 30 matched patients (30 eyes) with myopia or myopic astigmatism who served as controls. Changes of the IOP measurements (ΔIOP) obtained by GAT and DCT before and at 6 months after PRK in the operated eyes, and at baseline and 6 months later in the controls, were documented. Changes of the central corneal thickness (ΔCCT) were determined in the same fashion.
Results
The mean IOP readings obtained by DCT were comparable before and at 6 months after procedure (18.34 ± 3.03 mmHg and 17.87 ± 2.61 mmHg respectively,
p
= 0.41); whereas the mean IOP reading obtained by GAT decreased significantly 6 months postoperatively (17.92 ± 3.63 mmHg and 16.25 ± 2.66 mmHg,
p
< 0.001). A significant correlation was present between the ΔIOP obtained by GAT and ΔCCT (
r
= 0.61,
p
< 0.001). Similar correlation was not significant between the DCT-obtained ΔIOP and the ΔCCT (
r
= 0.07,
p
= 0.44). The mean ΔIOP obtained by GAT was significantly higher in the operated eyes than in the controls (−1.54 ± 1.45 vs 0.07 ± 0.44 mmHg,
p
= 0.02). The mean DCT-obtained ΔIOP was just marginally insignificant between the operated and nonoperated eyes (−0.63 ± 0.59 vs 0.02 ± 0.38 mmHg respectively;
p
= 0.09).
Conclusions
The authors recommend DCT after PRK in the cases with myopia or myopic astigmatism</description><identifier>ISSN: 0721-832X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1435-702X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00417-012-2142-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22940796</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Adult ; Astigmatism - physiopathology ; Astigmatism - surgery ; Cornea - physiopathology ; Corneal Pachymetry ; Female ; Humans ; Intraocular Pressure - physiology ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Myopia - physiopathology ; Myopia - surgery ; Ophthalmology ; Photorefractive Keratectomy ; Postoperative Period ; Prospective Studies ; Refractive Surgery ; Tonometry, Ocular - instrumentation ; Tonometry, Ocular - methods ; Visual Acuity - physiology ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology, 2013-02, Vol.251 (2), p.603-608</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag 2012</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-ed6f37a84862e55fe06bcb2feb85470eff33c8c00368533b1058607c0b2a86fd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-ed6f37a84862e55fe06bcb2feb85470eff33c8c00368533b1058607c0b2a86fd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00417-012-2142-1$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00417-012-2142-1$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27907,27908,41471,42540,51302</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22940796$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sadigh, Afshin Lotfi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fouladi, Rohollah F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hashemi, Hassan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beheshtnejad, Amir Houshang</creatorcontrib><title>A comparison between Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry after photorefractive keratectomy</title><title>Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology</title><addtitle>Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol</addtitle><addtitle>Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol</addtitle><description>Background
The intraocular pressure (IOP) could be measured by both Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and dynamic contour tonometry (DCT). Although these two methods have been discussed widely after laser-assisted sub-epithelial keratectomy (LASIK), there is little data in the cases undergoing photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). We aimed to compare the changes of IOP measurements obtained by GAT and DCT after PRK for myopia/myopic astigmatism.
Methods
This prospective study enrolled 77 candidates (154 eyes) for PRK to correct myopia or myopic astigmatism and 30 matched patients (30 eyes) with myopia or myopic astigmatism who served as controls. Changes of the IOP measurements (ΔIOP) obtained by GAT and DCT before and at 6 months after PRK in the operated eyes, and at baseline and 6 months later in the controls, were documented. Changes of the central corneal thickness (ΔCCT) were determined in the same fashion.
Results
The mean IOP readings obtained by DCT were comparable before and at 6 months after procedure (18.34 ± 3.03 mmHg and 17.87 ± 2.61 mmHg respectively,
p
= 0.41); whereas the mean IOP reading obtained by GAT decreased significantly 6 months postoperatively (17.92 ± 3.63 mmHg and 16.25 ± 2.66 mmHg,
p
< 0.001). A significant correlation was present between the ΔIOP obtained by GAT and ΔCCT (
r
= 0.61,
p
< 0.001). Similar correlation was not significant between the DCT-obtained ΔIOP and the ΔCCT (
r
= 0.07,
p
= 0.44). The mean ΔIOP obtained by GAT was significantly higher in the operated eyes than in the controls (−1.54 ± 1.45 vs 0.07 ± 0.44 mmHg,
p
= 0.02). The mean DCT-obtained ΔIOP was just marginally insignificant between the operated and nonoperated eyes (−0.63 ± 0.59 vs 0.02 ± 0.38 mmHg respectively;
p
= 0.09).
Conclusions
The authors recommend DCT after PRK in the cases with myopia or myopic astigmatism</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Astigmatism - physiopathology</subject><subject>Astigmatism - surgery</subject><subject>Cornea - physiopathology</subject><subject>Corneal Pachymetry</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intraocular Pressure - physiology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Myopia - physiopathology</subject><subject>Myopia - surgery</subject><subject>Ophthalmology</subject><subject>Photorefractive Keratectomy</subject><subject>Postoperative Period</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Refractive Surgery</subject><subject>Tonometry, Ocular - instrumentation</subject><subject>Tonometry, Ocular - methods</subject><subject>Visual Acuity - physiology</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0721-832X</issn><issn>1435-702X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU9LHTEUxYMo9VX7AdyUgW66mXqTTP68pYi1gtCNgruQydzYsW-SaZKnvG9vHs-KCK6yOL9zbg6HkBMKPyiAOs0AHVUtUNYy2rGW7pEF7bhoFbC7fbIAxWirObs7JJ9zfoCKc0E_kUPGlh2opVyQfNa4OM02jTmGpsfyhBiay7gaJhtCY-d5ZYMtYxVLDHHCkjaNDUMzbIKdRlfdocR1eqv6gqmZ_8QSE_pkXRkfsfmLyRZ0JU6bY3Lg7Srjl5f3iNz-vLg5_9Ve_768Oj-7bh1XrLQ4SM-V1Z2WDIXwCLJ3PfPYa9EpQO85d9oBcKkF5z0FoSUoBz2zWvqBH5Hvu9w5xX9rzMVMY3a4qo0wrrOhTAvQIIWo6Ld36EMtFervtlTHpF4uaaXojnIp5lzLmTmNk00bQ8FsFzG7RUxdxGwXMVvP15fkdT_h8Or4P0EF2A7IVQr3mN6c_jD1GetWmI4</recordid><startdate>20130201</startdate><enddate>20130201</enddate><creator>Sadigh, Afshin Lotfi</creator><creator>Fouladi, Rohollah F.</creator><creator>Hashemi, Hassan</creator><creator>Beheshtnejad, Amir Houshang</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130201</creationdate><title>A comparison between Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry after photorefractive keratectomy</title><author>Sadigh, Afshin Lotfi ; Fouladi, Rohollah F. ; Hashemi, Hassan ; Beheshtnejad, Amir Houshang</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-ed6f37a84862e55fe06bcb2feb85470eff33c8c00368533b1058607c0b2a86fd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Astigmatism - physiopathology</topic><topic>Astigmatism - surgery</topic><topic>Cornea - physiopathology</topic><topic>Corneal Pachymetry</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intraocular Pressure - physiology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Myopia - physiopathology</topic><topic>Myopia - surgery</topic><topic>Ophthalmology</topic><topic>Photorefractive Keratectomy</topic><topic>Postoperative Period</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Refractive Surgery</topic><topic>Tonometry, Ocular - instrumentation</topic><topic>Tonometry, Ocular - methods</topic><topic>Visual Acuity - physiology</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sadigh, Afshin Lotfi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fouladi, Rohollah F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hashemi, Hassan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beheshtnejad, Amir Houshang</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sadigh, Afshin Lotfi</au><au>Fouladi, Rohollah F.</au><au>Hashemi, Hassan</au><au>Beheshtnejad, Amir Houshang</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparison between Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry after photorefractive keratectomy</atitle><jtitle>Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology</jtitle><stitle>Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol</stitle><addtitle>Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol</addtitle><date>2013-02-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>251</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>603</spage><epage>608</epage><pages>603-608</pages><issn>0721-832X</issn><eissn>1435-702X</eissn><abstract>Background
The intraocular pressure (IOP) could be measured by both Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and dynamic contour tonometry (DCT). Although these two methods have been discussed widely after laser-assisted sub-epithelial keratectomy (LASIK), there is little data in the cases undergoing photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). We aimed to compare the changes of IOP measurements obtained by GAT and DCT after PRK for myopia/myopic astigmatism.
Methods
This prospective study enrolled 77 candidates (154 eyes) for PRK to correct myopia or myopic astigmatism and 30 matched patients (30 eyes) with myopia or myopic astigmatism who served as controls. Changes of the IOP measurements (ΔIOP) obtained by GAT and DCT before and at 6 months after PRK in the operated eyes, and at baseline and 6 months later in the controls, were documented. Changes of the central corneal thickness (ΔCCT) were determined in the same fashion.
Results
The mean IOP readings obtained by DCT were comparable before and at 6 months after procedure (18.34 ± 3.03 mmHg and 17.87 ± 2.61 mmHg respectively,
p
= 0.41); whereas the mean IOP reading obtained by GAT decreased significantly 6 months postoperatively (17.92 ± 3.63 mmHg and 16.25 ± 2.66 mmHg,
p
< 0.001). A significant correlation was present between the ΔIOP obtained by GAT and ΔCCT (
r
= 0.61,
p
< 0.001). Similar correlation was not significant between the DCT-obtained ΔIOP and the ΔCCT (
r
= 0.07,
p
= 0.44). The mean ΔIOP obtained by GAT was significantly higher in the operated eyes than in the controls (−1.54 ± 1.45 vs 0.07 ± 0.44 mmHg,
p
= 0.02). The mean DCT-obtained ΔIOP was just marginally insignificant between the operated and nonoperated eyes (−0.63 ± 0.59 vs 0.02 ± 0.38 mmHg respectively;
p
= 0.09).
Conclusions
The authors recommend DCT after PRK in the cases with myopia or myopic astigmatism</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>22940796</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00417-012-2142-1</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0721-832X |
| ispartof | Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology, 2013-02, Vol.251 (2), p.603-608 |
| issn | 0721-832X 1435-702X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1285080655 |
| source | MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
| subjects | Adult Astigmatism - physiopathology Astigmatism - surgery Cornea - physiopathology Corneal Pachymetry Female Humans Intraocular Pressure - physiology Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Myopia - physiopathology Myopia - surgery Ophthalmology Photorefractive Keratectomy Postoperative Period Prospective Studies Refractive Surgery Tonometry, Ocular - instrumentation Tonometry, Ocular - methods Visual Acuity - physiology Young Adult |
| title | A comparison between Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry after photorefractive keratectomy |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T16%3A07%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20comparison%20between%20Goldmann%20applanation%20tonometry%20and%20dynamic%20contour%20tonometry%20after%20photorefractive%20keratectomy&rft.jtitle=Graefe's%20archive%20for%20clinical%20and%20experimental%20ophthalmology&rft.au=Sadigh,%20Afshin%20Lotfi&rft.date=2013-02-01&rft.volume=251&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=603&rft.epage=608&rft.pages=603-608&rft.issn=0721-832X&rft.eissn=1435-702X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00417-012-2142-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2883804141%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1284268991&rft_id=info:pmid/22940796&rfr_iscdi=true |