Poor utility of intraocular pressure correction formulae in individual glaucoma and glaucoma suspect patients

Influence of Diabetes Mellitus on Glaucoma-Relevant Examination Results in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma

Primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) is no longer considered an isolated eye pressure-dependent optic neuropathy, but a neurodegenerative disease in which oxidative stress and neuroinflammation are prominent. These processes may be exacerbated by additional systemic diseases. The most common are arterial hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus. Using diabetes mellitus as an example, it will be shown how far-reaching the influence of such a systemic disease can be on both the functional and the structural diagnostic methods for POAG. This knowledge is essential, since these interferences can lead to misinterpretations of POAG, which can also affect therapeutic decisions.

Comparison between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry correcting equations

In order to investigate the reliability of correcting GAT formulas in comparison with dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), this study included 112 right eyes of 112 healthy subjects aged from 21 to 77 years, whose eyes underwent to a full ophthalmologic exam. IOP was measured in each eye with DCT and then with GAT. IOP values obtained with GAT were corrected with 10 equations and then compared with those provided by DCT. Participants mean age was 42.24 ± 14.08 years; mean IOP measured with DCT was 17.61 ± 2.87 and 15.50 ± 2.47 mmHg, measured with GAT. The mean discordance between DCT and GAT measurements was 2.11 ± 2.24 mmHg. All the correcting formulas, but Srodka one (p ˂ 0.001), tend to increase the difference between GAT and DCT. According to these results Śródka equation provides the best correction, reducing the difference between the two IOP measurement methods of - 0.03 ± 0.85 mmHg. Other equations do not provide a valid improvement of the agreement between the two methods or they provide a worsening of the agreement.

Icare versus Goldmann in a randomised middle-aged population : The influence of central corneal thickness and refractive errors

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the measurements of intraocular pressure by two tonometers, the Icare rebound tonometer and the Goldmann applanation tonometer, in a randomised screening study. The influence of refraction and central corneal thickness on the measurements was also evaluated.

METHODS

Intraocular pressure was measured with rebound tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometer in 1266 participants; refraction and central corneal thickness were also determined. One randomised eye of each participant was selected for this report's analysis. A Bland-Altman plot was used to compare the values obtained with the two devices.

RESULTS

The correlation between rebound tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometer was good: the intraclass correlation coefficient (r) between the two methods was 0.735 (p < 0.001). The mean difference (rebound tonometer-Goldmann applanation tonometer) was 0.11 ± 2.3 mmHg. The difference was not statistically significant (95% confidence interval: 0.11 to 0.13, p = 0.09). With increasing central corneal thickness, not only did intraocular pressure values with both devices increase, but the difference between them also increased. Refraction (spherical equivalent) did not influence intraocular pressure or the rebound tonometer-Goldmann applanation tonometer difference. However, high astigmatism (≥2D) exerted an influence on intraocular pressure values taken with Goldmann applanation tonometer.

CONCLUSION

Measurements with rebound tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometer are relatively uniform although rebound tonometer slightly overestimated intraocular pressure. Both rebound tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometer and the difference between these devices were affected by central corneal thickness but not by refraction. Higher astigmatism affected Goldmann applanation tonometer more than rebound tonometer. It is concluded that rebound tonometer is a reliable method for measuring intraocular pressure in a population-based screening study.

Glaucoma Progression and its Relationship with Corrected and Uncorrected Intraocular Pressure in Eyes with History of Refractive Corneal Surgery

PURPOSE

To investigate glaucoma progression and its relationship with corrected and uncorrected intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with a history of refractive corneal surgery (RCS).

METHODS

Totally, 56 eyes of 56 primary open-angle glaucoma patients who had a history of RCS were included. Mean keratometry and central corneal thickness were measured at the time of glaucoma diagnosis. Three IOP measurements, i.e., uncorrected IOP (_UCIOP) and corrected IOP calculated by applying the Kohlhaas (_CKIOP) and Ehlers (_CEIOP) formulas, were used. Participants were categorized into two groups (low-teen [<15 mmHg] and high-teen [≥15 mmHg] groups) according to the mean follow-up IOP, in each of the three IOP measurements. Glaucoma progression was determined based on either structurally or functionally by stereoscopic optic disc/retinal nerve fiber layer photographs or visual field tests. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were compared between the low-teens group and high-teens group for each IOP measurement. Risk factors for glaucoma progression, including uncorrected and corrected IOP measurements, were analyzed using a Cox proportional-hazards model.

RESULTS

Among total eyes, glaucoma progression was found in 19 (34%) eyes during 4.3 years of mean follow-up period. Individual values of uncorrected IOP and corrected IOP showed significant differences (p < 0.001). Incidence of glaucoma progression was higher in high-teens group than in low-teens group by corrected IOP values (both Kohlhaas and Ehlers, p = 0.006, 0.003), but not by uncorrected IOP values (p = 0.749). The cumulative probability of glaucoma progression was significantly greater in the high-teens group than in the low-teens group using the Elhers formula determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis (p = 0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

For glaucoma eyes with history of RCS, high-teen group by corrected mean follow-up IOP showed more glaucoma progression than low-teen group. More intensive IOP-lowering treatment will be required for patient with high-teen follow-up corrected IOP to prevent glaucoma progression.

Correlation Between Dynamic Contour Tonometry, Uncorrected and Corrected Goldmann Applanation Tonometry, and Stage of Glaucoma

Importance

Accurate determination of intraocular pressure (IOP) is crucial for the diagnosis and management of glaucoma. Objective clinical evaluation of the correction equations for Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) is lacking.

Objectives

To investigate the difference between corrected and conventional GAT and Pascal dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) measurements, as well as the correlation between discordant IOP values and stage of glaucoma.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This prospective cross-sectional case series was conducted at the Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Zurich, and Talacker Eye Center between July 1, 2011, and May 31, 2016, among 112 white patients with glaucoma.

Interventions

Intraocular pressure measurements were performed with GAT and DCT in a randomized order. Goldmann applanation tonometry measurements were modified with 5 correction equations.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was degree of concordance between corrected or uncorrected GAT and DCT measurements. The secondary end point was association between discordant IOP measurements and the stage of glaucoma, as assessed by the Glaucoma Severity Score.

Results

Among the 112 patients (67 women and 45 men; mean [SD] age, 66.3 [13.1] years), 63 of the eyes in the study (56.3%) were left eyes and 85 patients (75.9%) were taking ocular antihypertensive medications. Mean (SD) IOP was 20.3 (4.5) mm Hg (95% CI, 19.4-21.1) as measured by DCT and 17.0 [4.1] mm Hg (95% CI, 16.3-17.8) as measured by GAT. The mean (SD) discordance between DCT and GAT measurements was -3.3 (2.0) mm Hg (95% CI, 2.9-3.6). The 5 corrected GAT values ranged from -2.7 to -5.4 mm Hg compared with DCT. The mean (SD) result of the Dresdner correction formula (17.6 [4.1] mm Hg) was closer to the DCT measurement than the original GAT measurement. The mean (SD) Glaucoma Severity Score was 4.7 (3.4) (95% CI, 4.1-5.4). The uncorrected discordance IOPDCT - IOPGAT showed a positive correlation with the Glaucoma Severity Score (rs = 0.33; P < .001) and a negative correlation with central corneal thickness (rs = -0.22; P = .02).

Conclusions and Relevance

In comparison with DCT measurements, these data suggest that GAT values are significantly discordant in eyes with thin corneas and advanced glaucoma. Application of GAT-based correction formulas involves a possible risk of creating an even greater number of unpredictable measurement errors. Hence, we advise with caution, especially pertaining to eyes with thin corneas, to not place reliance on GAT readings, and abandon any correction formula.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01474070.

A Comparative Analysis of Goldmann Tonometry Correction

PURPOSE

The measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) by Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) is based on assumptions about corneal parameters. To correct for variations in corneal curvature and thickness, a number of equations have been proposed. This study evaluates the in vivo accuracy of these equations from individuals with primary open-angle glaucoma and compared them with measurements taken using the Pascal dynamic contour tonometer (DCT), which makes no assumptions about the corneal geometry or biomechanics.

PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

The study included 108 participants with primary open-angle glaucoma (47 male and 61 female) with an age range of 39 to 81 years. Participants were recruited from the Glaucoma Clinic at Wroclaw Medical University. A full ophthalmologic examination was conducted on all participants. Participants were divided into 3 groups depending on IOP as measured by GAT. Six formulae were applied and the results were compared with measurements taken with DCT.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

To determine as to which formula provides the closest value to IOP measured with DCT.

RESULTS

For IOP values ≤29 mm Hg, 2 of the formulae showed the smallest and comparable mean differences and SDs between corrected IOP values obtained with GAT and those measured with DCT. For IOP≥30 mm Hg, the formula derived from the model of corneal applanation that takes into account corneal buckling showed the closest agreement with measurements taken using DCT.

CONCLUSIONS

Correction formulae provide widely varying results and their appropriateness can depend on the IOP values.

Assessment of intraocular pressure measured by Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer, Goldmann Applanation Tonometry, and Dynamic Contour Tonometry in healthy individuals

AIM

To investigate the accuracy of intraocular pressure (IOP) as measured by a Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA), as well as the relationship between central corneal thickness (CCT) and IOP as measured by ORA, Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), and dynamic contour tonometry (DCT).

METHODS

A total of 158 healthy individuals (296 eyes) were chosen randomly for measurement of IOP. After CCT was measured using A-ultrasound (A-US), IOP was measured by ORA, GAT, and DCT devices in a randomized order. The IOP values acquired using each of the three tonometries were compared, and the relationship between CCT and IOP values were analyzed separately. Two IOP values, Goldmann-correlated IOP value (IOPg) and corneal-compensated intraocular pressure (IOPcc), were got using ORA. Three groups were defined according to CCT: 1) thin cornea (CCT<520µm); 2) normal-thickness cornea (CCT: 520-580µm); and 3) thick cornea (CCT>580µm) groups.

RESULTS

In normal subjects, IOP measurements were 14.95±2.99mmHg with ORA (IOPg), 15.21±2.77mmHg with ORA (IOPcc), 15.22±2.77mmHg with GAT, and 15.49±2.56mmHg with DCT. Mean differences were 0.01±2.29mmHg between IOPcc and GAT (P>0.05) and 0.28±2.20mmHg between IOPcc and DCT (P>0.05). There was a greater correlation between IOPcc and DCT (r=0.946, P=0.000) than that between IOPcc and GAT (r=0.845, P=0.000). DCT had a significant correlation with GAT (r=0.854, P=0.000). GAT was moderately correlated with CCT (r=0.296, P<0.001), while IOPcc showed a weak but significant correlation with CCT (r=-0.155, P=0.007). There was a strong negative correlation between CCT and the difference between IOPcc and GAT(r=-0.803, P=0.000), with every 10µm increase in CCT resulting in an increase in this difference of 0.35mmHg. The thick cornea group (CCT>580µm) showed the least significant correlation between IOPcc and GAT (r=0.859, P=0.000); while the thin cornea group (CCT<520µm) had the most significant correlation between IOPcc and GAT (r=0.926, P=0.000). The correlated differences between IOPcc and DCT were not significant in any of the three groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Measurement of IOP by ORA has high repeatability and is largely consistent with GAT measurements. Moreover, the ORA measurements are affected only to a small extent by CCT, and are likely to be much closer to the real IOP value than GAT.

Brillouin optical microscopy for corneal biomechanics

PURPOSE

The mechanical properties of corneal tissue are linked to prevalent ocular diseases and therapeutic procedures. Brillouin microscopy is a novel optical technology that enables three-dimensional mechanical imaging. In this study, the feasibility of this noncontact technique was tested for in situ quantitative assessment of the biomechanical properties of the cornea.

METHODS

Brillouin light-scattering involves a spectral shift proportional to the longitudinal modulus of elasticity of the tissue. A 532-nm single-frequency laser and a custom-developed ultrahigh-resolution spectrometer were used to measure the Brillouin frequency. Confocal scanning was used to perform Brillouin elasticity imaging of the corneas of whole bovine eyes. The longitudinal modulus of the bovine corneas was compared before and after riboflavin corneal collagen photo-cross-linking. The Brillouin measurements were then compared with conventional stress-strain mechanical test results.

RESULTS

High-resolution Brillouin images of the cornea were obtained, revealing a striking depth-dependent variation of the elastic modulus across the cornea. Along the central axis, the Brillouin frequency shift varied gradually from 8.2 GHz in the epithelium to 7.5 GHz near the endothelium. The coefficients of the down slope were measured to be approximately 1.09, 0.32, and 2.94 GHz/mm in the anterior, posterior, and innermost stroma, respectively. On riboflavin collagen cross-linking, marked changes in the axial Brillouin profiles (P < 0.001) were noted before and after cross-linking.

CONCLUSIONS

Brillouin imaging can assess the biomechanical properties of cornea in situ with high spatial resolution. This novel technique has the potential for use in clinical diagnostics and treatment monitoring.

The effect of thin, thick, and normal corneas on Goldmann intraocular pressure measurements and correction formulae in individual eyes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the usefulness of the central corneal thickness (CCT)-based correction formulae for stratified CCT groups, with intraocular pressure (IOP) from the Pascal dynamic contour tonometer (PDCT) as the reference standard.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred eighty-nine patients attending a specialist glaucoma practice and a mixture of normal subjects and subjects with confirmed glaucomatous optic neuropathy.

METHODS

Intraocular pressure was measured using PDCT, Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), and the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA; Reichert Corp, Buffalo, NY). The GAT readings were obtained before automated readings and were adjusted for CCT using 4 different correction formulae. Discrepancies between GAT and CCT-corrected GAT readings were evaluated after stratification into thin, intermediate, and thick CCT groups. The IOP measurements from GAT, the ORA, and CCT-adjusted IOP were compared against PDCT IOP measurements using Bland-Altman analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Mean, 95% limits of agreement, and proportion of patients with IOP difference of 20% or more between PDCT IOP and each of GAT IOP, Goldmann-correlated IOP (IOPg), corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc), and adjusted IOP using CCT-based correction formulae.

RESULTS

Average PDCT IOP values were higher than GAT, IOPg, IOPcc, and CCT-adjusted IOP. The GAT IOP readings demonstrated poor agreement with PDCT IOP (95% limits of agreement, ± 4.7 mmHg); however, IOPg, IOPcc, and adjustment of GAT IOP with CCT-based formulae resulted in even poorer agreement (range of 95% limits of agreement, ± 5.1 to 6.7 mmHg). If PDCT was used as the reference standard, there was a 26% to 39% risk of making an erroneous IOP adjustment of magnitude of 20% or more at all levels of CCT. This risk was greatest in the patients with thicker corneas (CCT, ≥568 μm).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjusting IOP using CCT-based formulae resulted in poorer agreement with PDCT IOP when compared with unadjusted G AT IOP. If PDCT is the closest measure we have to intracameral IOP, there is a risk of creating clinically significant error after adjustment of GAT IOP with CCT-based correction formulae, especially in thicker corneas. This study suggests that although CCT may be useful in population analyses, CCT-based correction formulae should not be applied to individuals.

Comparison of Goldmann and Pascal tonometry in relation to corneal hysteresis and central corneal thickness in nonglaucomatous eyes

Objective:

To compare measurements obtained by Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and Pascal dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), and to study their relationship to corneal thickness and biomechanical properties in nonglaucomatous eyes.

Methods:

This is a prospective and randomized study of 200 eyes from 200 non-glaucomatous subjects who underwent intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements by GAT and DCT. The two methods were compared and assessed for agreement by means of the Bland–Altman plot. Central corneal thickness (CCT) and corneal hysteresis (CH) were obtained by ultrasound pachymeter and Ocular Response Analyzer, respectively. The effect of CH and CCT was correlated with the DCT/GAT IOP differences.

Results:

Mean age was 57.4 ± 14.7 years (range 24–82 years). Mean IOP measurements obtained were 16.7 ± 3.2 mmHg by GAT and 19.4 ± 3.3 mmHg by DCT. DCT showed a statistically significant higher mean IOP (2.7 ± 1.9 mmHg, P < 0.001) compared with GAT. Mean CCT and CH were 546.5 ± 40 μm and 10.85 ± 2.0 mmHg, respectively. The differences in IOP (DCT – GAT) were significantly correlated with CCT and CH (Pearson’s correlation coefficient r = −0.517 and −0.355, P < 0.0001, respectively). The difference between the two correlation coefficients was statistically significant (P < 0.05, Z-statistic). According to the Bland–Altman plot, the results of the two methods were clinically different.

Conclusion:

Significantly higher IOP readings were obtained by DCT than by GAT in nonglaucomatous subjects. The IOP differences between the two methods were associated with CCT and CH, suggesting that DCT was less dependent on corneal parameters. Each method provides clinically different IOP values, indicating that DCT and GAT should not be used interchangeably.