Comparison of Intraocular Pressure Measurements Between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry and Reichert 7 Noncontact Tonometry:

[Comparison of Goldmann tonometry with air-puff tonometry. A study of 159 patients in Abidjan]

PURPOSE

The goal of this study was to compare the intraocular pressure (IOP) values obtained with each of the tonometry methods as well as to study the effect of corneal pachymetry on the measurements obtained by each method.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We carried out a cross-sectional, descriptive, analytical, prospective study in the ophthalmology department of a multispecialty clinic in Abidjan (Ivory Coast) from April 2018 to August 2018. Patients aged 15 and over were included in the study. Over this period, IOP was measured by Goldman Applanation Tonometer (HaagStreit, AT 900, Switzerland) and air-puff Tonopachymeter (Nidek, NT 530 P, Japan), which also permitted measurement of central optical corneal pachymetry. The data analyzed focused on socio-demographic characteristics, ophthalmologic history, tonometry, and central corneal pachymetry. The comparison of the values obtained by both devices and the effect of central corneal thickness (CCT) on tonometry were analyzed using EpiDataAnalysis V2.2.2.183 software.

RESULTS

We examined 318 eyes of 159 patients whose mean age was 40±12.57 years, range 16 to 82 years. The gender ratio was 1. A past ophthalmologic history was noted in 79.2% of patients. The mean IOP by Goldmann applanation tonometry was 12.75±3.17mmHg, and that by non-contact air-puff tonometry was 13.83±3.80mmHg. The mean central corneal thickness was 530.50±32.61μm. The difference between IOP measured by non-contact tonometry and that measured by contact tonometry was statistically significant, with P=0.00. There was no statistically significant relationship between central corneal pachymetry and contact tonometry (P=0.80). However, there was a statistically significant relationship between non-contact tonometry and central pachymetry (P=0.00). The values obtained with the air-puff tonometer are more affected by central corneal thickness.

CONCLUSION

The values obtained by Goldmann applanation tonometry are not equivalent to those obtained by non-contact air-puff tonopachymetry.

[Current state of ophthalmic tonometry]

Currently, the level of intraocular pressure (IOP) can be assessed with a large number of tonometers, which differ in the principle of action, the place of application and the degree of invasiveness. All the methods in use - except for direct manometry - allow only indirect judgement of the level of ophthalmotonus. The quality of tonometric measurement is influenced by many factors, from the choice of tonometer to the analysis of the results obtained by the doctor. The use of complex methods for assessing the level of intraocular pressure provides additional information that increases its diagnostic value. This article summarizes current information about modern methods of tonometry, and describes their features.

A Comparison of the Corrected Intraocular Pressure Obtained by the Corvis ST and Reichert 7CR Tonometers in Glaucoma Patients

The purpose of the study was to investigate the accuracy of two corrected intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements by Corvis Scheimpflug Technology (CST)-IOPpachy and by corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc) using the Reichert 7CR (7CR) tonometers. We also investigated the effects of corneal anatomical and structural parameters on the IOP measurements. The participants included 90 primary open-angle glaucoma patients. We assessed the IOP measurements, obtained by the CST, 7CR, and Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), using a paired t-test with Bonferroni correction, Bland-Altman plots, and multiple regression analyses. The 7CR-IOPcc gave the highest value (15.5 ± 2.7 mmHg), followed by the 7CR-IOPg (13.7 ± 3.1 mmHg), GAT-IOP (13.6 ± 2.2 mmHg), CST-IOP (10.3 ± 2.6 mmHg), and CST-IOPpachy (9.7 ± 2.5 mmHg). The values of CST-IOPpachy were significantly lower than those obtained by the other IOP measurement methods (all, p < 0.01). The values of 7CR-IOPcc were significantly higher than those obtained by the other IOP measurement methods (all, p < 0.01). Bland-Altman plots showed a mean difference between the GAT-IOP and the other IOP measurements (CST-IOP, CST-IOPpachy, 7CR-IOPg, and 7CR-IOPcc), which were -3.20, -3.82, 0.14, and 2.00 mmHg, respectively. The widths of the 95% limits of agreement between all pairs of IOP measurements were greater than 3 mmHg. With the exception of the 7CR-IOPcc, all of the IOP variations were explained by regression coefficients involving gender, average corneal curvature, and central corneal thickness. The IOP values obtained by the GAT, CST, and 7CR were not interchangeable. Each new IOP measurement device that was corrected for ocular structure had its own limitations.