Journals / Glokom Katarakt / 2012 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3

Rebound tonometresi ve goldmann applanasyon tonometresinin klinik olarak karşılaştırılması: Santral kornea kalınlığının etkisi

Clinical comparison of rebound tonometer with goldmann applanation tonometer: Effects of central corneal thickness

Pages
177–183
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In eyes with a healthy cornea, the IOP measurements from the rebound tonometer and the GAT seemed to be similarly affected by CCT.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: This clinical study was conducted to compare the performance of a rebound tonometer with that of the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) in the measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) and to evaluate the effect of central corneal thickness (CCT) on IOP measurement with both devices.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The patients were divided into 3 groups according to CCT measurement and OHTS criteria as follows: group 1 with CCT<555 μm; group 2 with CCT 555-584 μm; and group 3 with CCT≥585 μm.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In eyes with a healthy cornea, the IOP measurements from the rebound tonometer and the GAT seemed to be similarly affected by CCT.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kornea · Göz içi basınç · Tonometri

Abstract

Purpose: This clinical study was conducted to compare the performance of a rebound tonometer with that of the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) in the measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) and to evaluate the effect of central corneal thickness (CCT) on IOP measurement with both devices. Materials and Methods: One hundred and sixty-five healthy subjects were tested using rebound tonometer and GAT by two observers. The patients were divided into 3 groups according to CCT measurement and OHTS criteria as follows: group 1 with CCT<555 μm; group 2 with CCT 555-584 μm; and group 3 with CCT≥585 μm. Correlation analysis was performed to compare the 2 devices; paired sample t test, Bland and Altman analysis were used. Results: The mean IOP levels measured by rebound tonometer and GAT were 13.9±2.3 and 13.5±2.5 mm Hg in Group1 (p=.587), 15.76±2.7 and 15.3±3.1 mmHg in Group 2 (p=.563), and 17.76±2.6 and 18.42±3.03 mm Hg in Group 3 (p=.878), respectively. Rebound tonometry and GAT readings were strongly correlated in terms of IOP measurement in all CCT groups (r=0.78, p<.0001). Conclusions: The use of rebound tonometer is effective and safe in comparison to GAT readings. In eyes with a healthy cornea, the IOP measurements from the rebound tonometer and the GAT seemed to be similarly affected by CCT.

Özet

Amaç: Bu klinik çalışma rebound tonometresi ile Goldmann applanasyon tonometresi (GAT) göz içi basıncı (GİB) ölçümlerinin karşılaştırılması ve her iki cihazın GİB ölçümlerinin santral kornea kalınlığı (SKK) üzerine olan etkisini değerlendirmek amacıyla planlanmıştır. Metod: Yüzaltmışbeş sağlıklı birey iki gözlemci tarafından rebound tonometresi ve GAT kullanılarak test edildi. Hastaların SKK ölçümleri OHTS kriterlerine göre 3 gruba ayrıldı: SKK<555 μm olanlar grup 1; SKK 555-584 μm olanlar grup 2; SKK≥585 μm olanlar grup 3. İki cihazın ölçümlerinin karşılaştırılması için korelasyon analizi; paired sample t testi ve Bland ve Altman analizi kullanıldı. Sonuçlar: Rebound tonometre ve GAT ile ölçülen ortalama GİB değerleri sırasıyla Grup 1'de 13.9±2.3 ve 13.5±2.5 mmHg (p=.587), Grup 2'de 15.76±2.7 ve 15.3±3.1 mmHg (p=.563) ve Grup 3'de 17.76±2.6 ve 18.42±3.03 mmHg (p=.878) idi. Tartışma: Rebound tonometre kullanımı GAT ölçümleri ile karşılaştırıldığında oldukça efektif ve güvenilirdir. Sağlıklı korneası olan gözlerde, rebound tonometre ve GAT göziçi basıncı ölçümleri SKK'dan eşit derecede etkileniyor gibi gözükmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

BAYAR, S. A., AKMAN, A., ÇETİNKAYA, A., YAMAN, E. P., TEKİNDAL, M. A., AKOVA, Y. A. (2012). Rebound tonometresi ve goldmann applanasyon tonometresinin klinik olarak karşılaştırılması: Santral kornea kalınlığının etkisi. Glokom Katarakt, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3, 177–183. https://ajindex.com/articles/215405

References (16)

  1. Leske MC. The epidemiology of open-angle glaucoma: a review. Am J Epidemiol 1983;118:166-91
  2. Shields MB, Ritch R, Krupin T. Classification of glaucomas. In: Ritch R, Shields MP, Krupin T (eds). The glaucomas. Mosby: St. Louis 1996;717-25
  3. Dielemans I, Vingerling JR, Hofman A, et al. Reliability of intraocular pressure measurement with the Goldmann applanation tonometer in epidemiological studies. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1994;232:141-4
  4. Whitacre MM, Stein R. Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers. Surv Ophthalmol 1993;38:1-30
  5. Kontiola AI, Goldblum D, Mittag T, et al. The induction/impact tonometer: a new instrument to measure intraocular pressure in the rat. Exp Eye Res 2001;73:781-5
  6. Kontiola AI. A new induction-based impact method for measuring intraocular pressure. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2000;78:142-5
  7. Danias J, Kontiola AI, Filippopoulos T, et al. Method for the noninvasive measurement of intraocular pressure in mice. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:1138-41
  8. Kontiola A. A new electromechanical method for measuring intraocular pressure. Doc Ophthalmol 1996-1997;93:265-76
  9. Kontiola A, Puska P. Measuring intraocular pressure with the Pulsair 3000 and Rebound tonometers in elderly patients without an anesthetic. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2004;242:3-7
  10. Goldblum D, Kontiola AI, Mittag T, et al. Non-invasive determination of intraocular pressure in the rat eye. Comparison of an electronic tonometer (TonoPen), and a rebound (impact probe) tonometer. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2002;240:942-6
  11. Kontiola AI, Goldblum D, Mittag T, et al. The induction/impact tonometer: a new instrument to measure intraocular pressure in the rat. Exp Eye Res 2001;73:781-5
  12. Iliev ME, Goldblum D, Katsoulis K, et al. Comparison of rebound tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry and correlation with central corneal thickness. Br J Ophthalmol 2006;90:833-5
  13. Fernandes P, Diaz-Rey JA, Queiros A, et al. Comparison of the ICare rebound tonometer with the Goldmann tonometer in a normal population. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2005;25:436-40
  14. Brusini P, Salvetat ML, Zeppieri M, et al. Comparison of ICare tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients. J Glaucoma 2006;15:213-7
  15. Poostchi A, Mitchell R, Nicholas S, et al. The Icare rebound tonometer: comparisons with Goldmann tonometry, and influence of central corneal thickness. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2009;37:687-91
  16. Pelit A, Alta