Measuring Intraocular Pressure in Patients With Keratoconus With and Without Intrastromal Corneal Ring Segments

Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements between Easyton transpalpebral tonometry and Perkins, iCare iC100 and Corvis ST, and the influence of corneal and anterior scleral thickness

PURPOSE

To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements between Easyton transpalpebral tonometry and Perkins, iCare iC100 and Corvis ST. Also, to assess the influence of corneal characteristics and anterior scleral thickness (AST) on the IOP measurements.

METHODS

Sixty-nine eyes from 69 healthy subjects were included. IOP was measured by Easyton, Perkins, iC100 and Corvis ST (corrected IOP, bIOP; and non-corrected IOP, IOPnct). Other variables studied were AST, axial length (AL), and Corvis parameters: Length 1, velocity 1, length 2, velocity 2, peak distance, radius, deformation amplitude, and central corneal thickness (CCT). Pearson correlation, limits of agreement (LoA), and multiple regression analysis were calculated.

RESULTS

No significant differences in IOP between Easyton and Perkins, iC100, and bIOP were observed (all p > 0.05), being significant only between Perkins and IOPnct ( - 1.49 mmHg, p < 0.001). Bland-Altman graphs showed that the mean difference between Perkins and Easyton was 0.07 mmHg (p < 0.001), and LoA  - 7.49 to + 7.39 mmHg. Significant correlations were found between the measurements of Perkins and iC100, IOPnct, bIOP (r = 0.710, 0.628, 0.539; p < 0.001 respectively), iC100 and IOPnct, bIOP (r = 0.627, 0.513; p < 0.001, respectively). The multivariate regression analysis revealed that differences between Perkins and Easyton (adjusted R2 = 0.25) were influenced by AL (B = 1.28, p < 0.008), length 1 (B = 3.13, p < 0.018), and the radius (B = 1.26, p < 0.010). Differences between Perkins and bIOP (adjusted R2 = 0.21) were affected by the CCT (B = 0.029, p < 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

There are no significant differences in the IOP measurements between Perkins and Easyton, iC100 or bIOP. Length 1, radius, and CCT have limited influence on these differences, while AST did not show any effect.

Noncontact Intraocular Pressure Measurement over Bandage Contact Lens and the Effect of Pentacam and Corvis ST's IOP Correction System

Purpose

To evaluate the influence of intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement while wearing bandage contact lens (BCL) and the effect of Pentacam and Corvis ST's correction systems.

Methods

It was a prospective comparative study. Forty healthy subjects (40 eyes) were included in this study. Eyes were measured using noncontact tonometer (NCT), Corvis ST, and Pentacam before and after wearing BCL. Pentacam's five correction formulas (Ehlers formula, Shah formula, Dresden formula, Kohlhaas formula, Orssengo/Pye formula) and Corvis ST's correction formulas (Ehlers formula and biomechanical corrected formula) were used to correct the IOP values before and after BCL wearing. The IOP values were compared, and the correction effect of different systems were evaluated.

Results

The mean age of the subjects was 24.4 ± 0.60 years. The mean IOP obtained by NCT was 14.8 ± 3.2 mmHg before BCL wearing and was 15.7 ± 3.4 mmHg after BCL wearing. The mean IOP was significantly increased after BCL wearing (0.9 ± 2.9 mmHg, P=0.05). Four of the five Pentacam's correction formulas (except Kohlhaas formula) showed no significant difference in the mean corrected IOP values before and after BCL wearing (all P > 0.05). The mean IOP obtained by Corvis ST was 13.7 ± 2.8 mmHg before BCL wearing and was 15.0 ± 4.0 mmHg after BCL wearing. The mean IOP was significantly increased after BCL wearing (1.3 ± 2.4 mmHg, P < 0.05). Corvis ST's correction formula (Ehlers formula other than biomechanical corrected formula) showed no significant difference in the mean corrected IOP values before and after BCL wearing (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The IOP measurements over BCL by NCT and Corvis ST was found to be increased. The correction systems of Pentacam (Ehlers formula, Shah formula, Dresden formula, and Orssengo/Pye formula) and Corvis ST (Ehlers formula) are useful in correcting the IOP measuring deviation induced by BCL wearing.

Twenty-four hours intraocular pressure in keratoconic eyes assessed by applanation tonometry and Tono-Pen AVIA

AIM

To assess intraocular pressure (IOP) during the daily curve of intraocular pressure (DCPo) in keratoconic eyes and compare Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), without and with astigmatism correction (nGAT and cGAT) and Tono-Pen AVIA (TPA) assessment methods.

METHODS

Thirty-nine keratoconic eyes of 24 patients were assessed. DCPo was evaluated with five IOP measurements; four were performed with a GAT (nGAT and cGAT), and a Tono-Pen AVIA (TPA) at various times throughout the day.

RESULTS

Mean IOP DCPo values (mm Hg) were: nGAT, 9.9±2.6; cGAT, 11.3±2.6; TPA 12.3±3.1. Mean IOP DCPo differences (mm Hg) and Spearman's correlation coefficients were as follows: cGATc-nGAT, 1.32±1.31, r _s=0.879 (P<0.01); cGAT-TPA, -1.02±2.08, r _s=0.723 (P<0.01); and nGAT-TPA, -2.35±2.23, r _s=0.730 (P<0.01). Bland-Altman analysis for agreement between cGAT-TPA and nGAT-TPA mean IOP DCPo measurements revealed a mean difference of 1.02 (95%CI, 0.35-1.70) and 2.35 (95%CI, 1.62-3.07) mm Hg, respectively. Regression analysis yielded the following equation: TPA IOP=5.49+0.775×cGAT-0.015×ACD-0.299×corneal astig matism, which allowed us to infer TPA IOP values from other parameters.

CONCLUSION

In keratoconic eyes, IOP peaks of DCPo measurements are identified at 6 a.m., independent of the tonometer. The mean DCPo values are: TPA>cGAT>nGAT. IOP TPA measures are predictive of cGAT values, adjusted according to anterior chamber depth and corneal astigmatism.

Comparison between different tonometers following intrastromal corneal ring segments implantation

PURPOSE

To compare different intraocular pressure (IOP) readings in corneas with intrastromal corneal ring segments (ICRS) taken by three different tonometers; Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), air puff tonometer, and ocular response analyzer (ORA) corneal-compensated IOP (ORA-IOPcc) and determine the relation of these measurements to different corneal parameters taken by Pentacam.

METHODS

An observational cross-sectional analytic study included patients who underwent ICRS keraring implantation at 3 months. In each eye, the two rings were placed using the femtosecond laser assisted technique 5.5 or 6 mm from the center. IOP was measured using three different tonometers; GAT, air puff tonometer, and ocular response analyzer (ORA) corneal-compensated IOP (ORA-IOPcc).

RESULTS

Fifty eyes of 30 patients (20 males and 10 females) aged 27.56 ± 6.38 years were included. IOP measurements by GAT, air puff tonometer, and ORA-IOPcc were 13.28 ± 2.13 mmHg, 10.47 ± 2.55 mmHg, and 13.19 ± 2.78 mmHg, respectively. Comparisons between air puff and each of GAT and ORA-IOPcc were statistically highly significant (p-value <0.001).

CONCLUSION

IOP measurements taken by air puff tonometer were significantly lower than those taken by GAT and ORA-IOPcc. These differences were not constant across the pressure range but increased as the pressure values determined using GAT and ORA increased. ORA-IOPcc and GAT showed similar readings. No correlation was found between any of the IOP readings taken by the three tonometers and the central corneal thickness.

Influence of Axial Length on Intraocular Pressure Measurement With Three Tonometers in Childhood Glaucoma

PURPOSE

To determine the agreement between intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained using the handheld version of the Goldmann applanation (Perkins; Clement-Clarke, Haag-Streit, Harlow, United Kingdom), rebound Icare-Pro (Icare, Tiolat Oy, Helsinki, Finland), and Tonopen XL (Reichert Inc., Depew, NY) tonometers in children with childhood glaucoma and to identify factors that may affect those measurements.

METHODS

Ninety-one eyes of 46 children with early-onset childhood glaucoma were included in this cross-sectional study in which IOP, ocular axial length, anterior chamber depth, lens thickness, vitreous length, and central corneal thickness measurements were obtained under general anesthesia. Agreement between tonometers was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and the Bland-Altman method. The influence of ocular biometric parameters and central corneal thickness on IOP measurements was analyzed using multiple linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

The mean age of the children in the current study was 29.1 months (range: 13 to 31 months). The Icare-Pro and Tonopen XL overestimated IOP measurements compared to the Perkins tonometer (Icare-Pro-Perkins mean IOP difference: 2.2 ± 3.4 mm Hg, P < .0001, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5 to 2.9 vs Tonopen XL-Perkins mean IOP difference: 6.7 ± 7.1 mm Hg, P < .0001, 95% CI: 5.2 to 8.2). The Icare-Pro showed greater agreement with the Perkins tonometer than the Tonopen XL (ICC: 0.789, 95% CI: 0.697 to 0.856, P < .0001 vs 0.453, 95% CI: 0.272 to 0.603, P < .0001). Ocular axial length affected IOP measurements the most, finding increased impact on Tonopen XL (slope: 0.086, 95% CI: 0.013 to 0.16, P = .022 vs 0.997, 95% CI: 0.369 to 1.625, P = .002 vs 1.571, 95% CI: 0.541 to 2.602, P < .0001 for Perkins, Icare-Pro, and Tonopen XL IOP measurements, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Ocular axial length affects IOP measured by the Perkins, Icare-Pro, and Tonopen XL devices in patients with childhood glaucoma. The Icare-Pro shows more agreement with the Perkins tonometer than the Tonopen XL; therefore, it seems to be a more suitable option for these patients. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2020;57(1):27-32.].

The influence of corneal geometrical and biomechanical properties on tonometry readings in keratoconic eyes

PURPOSE

To identify the effect of corneal geometrical and biomechanical parameters on the intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained by Goldmann Applanation Tonometer (GAT), non-contact tonometer, iCare Pro Rebound Tonometer (IRT), Tonopen and Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA, Goldmann-correlated IOP: IOPg, corneal compensated IOP: IOPcc).

METHODS

We prospectively recruited patients with a tomographically confirmed diagnosis of keratoconus. IOP measurements were performed in the following order: non-contact tonometry, ORA, IRT, GAT and Tonopen. The means of the three IOP measurements were used for the analysis. Correlation analyses were performed to assess the association between tonometer readings and the corneal geometrical and biomechanical parameters including ORA waveform parameters. Tonometer variability was assessed using a stepwise linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients with keratoconus (27 females, mean age 30.8 ± 8.7 years) were evaluated. The highest mean IOP was measured by IOPcc (14.6 ± 2.3 mmHg) followed by IRT IOP (13.0 ± 3.2 mmHg), Tonopen IOP 12.0 ± 2.6 mmHg), GAT IOP (11.7 ± 3.1 mmHg), NCT IOP (10.2 ± 3.2 mmHg) and IOPg (10.2 ± 3.6 mmHg). NCT and IOPg were affected from all corneal parameters including thickness, curvature and biomechanical parameters. While GAT and IRT had significant correlations with corneal resistance factor (CRF) and corneal hysteresis, IOPcc only had a significant correlation with CRF. None of the corneal factors had any statistically significant correlation with Tonopen. CRF predicted tonometer measurement variability in 7 of the 15 inter-device variability assessments.

CONCLUSION

Tonopen was the least affected from the corneal parameters followed by IOPcc and GAT. CRF was a strong determinant of tonometer variability.

Tonometry after Intrastromal Corneal Ring Segments for Keratoconus

SIGNIFICANCE

Reliable intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement after intrastromal corneal ring segments (ICRS) implantation is a challenge because of altered corneal morphology. In this study, IOP is measured with four tonometers, compared with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) values and the influence of corneal parameters is established.

PURPOSE

This study compares IOP measurements made using different tonometers in patients implanted with ICRS and assesses the effects of central corneal thickness (CCT), corneal curvature, and corneal astigmatism on the IOP measurements obtained.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, IOP was measured using three different tonometers in 91 eyes of 91 patients with corneal ectasia implanted at least 6 months previously with ICRS. The tonometers tested were the TonoPen XL, Pascal dynamic contour tonometer (DCT), and iCare Pro rebound tonometer. GAT measurements were used as reference. Agreement among the IOPs provided by the different tonometers and the influence of corneal variables on the IOP measurements obtained were assessed using the Bland-Altman method, intraclass correlation coefficients, and multiple linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

Mean IOP differences were GAT versus TonoPen XL -0.8 ± 3.07 mm Hg, GAT versus DCT -1.0 ± 3.26 mm Hg, and GAT versus iCare Pro 0.8 ± 2.92 mm Hg. Our multiple linear regression analysis identified CCT as a confounding factor affecting all the tonometer readings but DCT-IOP.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients fitted with ICRS, IOP measurements made using the iCare Pro and TonoPen XL showed most agreement with GAT. Intraocular pressure measurements made by DCT were unaffected by corneal topographic factors though this procedure slightly overestimated GAT readings.