SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Kocaeli Tıp Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2

Effects of Hydrogel Contact Lens on Corneal Biomechanics and Intraocular Pressure

Hidrojel Kontakt Lensin Kornea Biyomekaniği ve Göz İçi Basıncı Üzerine Etkileri

Erdem ERİS
Sinan BEKMEZ
Tolga KOCATÜRK
Faruk BALICA
Pages
22–26
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

All measurements with CL were lower than those without CL, but only NCT, IOPcc and IOPg values were statistically significantly lower (p values

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:INTRODUCTION: To compare the corneal biomechanical parameters and intraocular pressure (IOP) mea surements with Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) and non-contact tonometry (NCT) before and after contact lens (CL) application. 2 METHODS: Fifty-eight healthy individuals were included in this prospective study.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), Goldmann-cor related IOP (IOPg), corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc) measured by ORA, and IOP measured by NCT were compared before and an hour after the hydrogel CL (with back vertex power of −3.00 Diopter) (1-Day Acuvue Moist-Etafilcon A, Johnson&Johnson) application.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:All measurements with CL were lower than those without CL, but only NCT, IOPcc and IOPg values were statistically significantly lower (p values
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: To compare the corneal biomechanical parameters and intraocular pressure (IOP) mea surements with Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) and non-contact tonometry (NCT) before and after contact lens (CL) application. 2 METHODS: Fifty-eight healthy individuals were included in this prospective study. Only one eye of each individual was chosen randomly in. Corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), Goldmann-cor related IOP (IOPg), corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc) measured by ORA, and IOP measured by NCT were compared before and an hour after the hydrogel CL (with back vertex power of −3.00 Diopter) (1-Day Acuvue Moist-Etafilcon A, Johnson&Johnson) application. The data were analysed using a paired sample t-test. RESULTS: Fifty-eight eyes of 58 participants were included in the study. 19 participants were female and 39 were male. The mean age of the participants was 26.53 ± 5.09. There was no statistically significant difference between the measurements of two different devices (measurements without and with CL p = 0.230 and p = 0.790, respectively). All measurements with CL were lower than those without CL, but only NCT, IOPcc and IOPg values were statistically significantly lower (p values

Özet

GİRİŞ ve AMAÇ: Oküler Cevap Analizörü (OCA) ve non-kontakt tonometre (NCT) kullanılarak, kontakt lens (KL) uygulamasından önce ve sonraki korneal biyomekanik parametreleri ve göz içi basıncı (GİB) ölçüm lerini karşılaştırmak. YÖNTEM ve GEREÇLER: Bu prospektif çalışmaya 58 sağlıklı birey dahil edildi. Her bireyin sadece bir gözü rastgele seçildi. Hidrojel KL uygulamasından önce ve bir saat sonra OCA ile ölçülen kornea histerezisi (KH), kornea direnç faktörü (KDF), Goldmann-korelasyonlu GİB (GİBg), korneal kompanse GİB (GİBkk) ve NCT ile ölçülen GİB karşılaştırıldı (arka tepe gücü −3.00 Diopter) (1-Day Acuvue Moist-Etafilcon A, Johnson & Johnson). Veriler, t-testi kullanılarak analiz edildi. BULGULAR: Çalışmaya 58 katılımcının 58 gözü dahil edildi. 19 katılımcı kadın, 39 erkek idi. Katılımcı ların yaş ortalaması 26.53 ± 5.09’du. İki farklı cihazın ölçümleri arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark yoktu (KL olmadan ve KL ile ölçümlerde sırasıyla p = 0,230 ve p = 0,790). KL ile yapılan tüm ölçümler, KL olmayanlardan daha düşüktü, ancak yalnızca NCT ile ölçülen GİB, OCA ile ölçülen GİBkk ve GİBg değerleri istatistiksel olarak anlamlı derecede daha düşüktü (sırasıyla p değerleri

🔖

Cite This Article

ERİS, E., BEKMEZ, S., KOCATÜRK, T., BALICA, F. (2022). Effects of Hydrogel Contact Lens on Corneal Biomechanics and Intraocular Pressure. Kocaeli Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2, 22–26. https://ajindex.com/articles/574679

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (5)

  1. Medeiros FA, Weinreb RN. Evaluation of the influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurements using the ocular response analyzer. J Glaucoma. 2006;15:364-370.
  2. Kotecha A. What biomechanical properties of the cornea are relevant for the clinician? Surv Ophthalmol. 2007;52:109-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.survophthal.2007.08.004 3.Edmund C. Corneal elasticity and ocular rigidity in normal and keratoconic eyes. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1988;66:134-140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-3768.1988.tb04000.x 4.Celik U, Aykut V, Celik B, Tas M, Yazgan S, Kaldrm H, Erdur SK. Acomparison of corneal biomechanical properties in patients with psoriasis and healthy subjects. Eye Contact Lens. 2015;41:127-129. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000000086 5.Kirgiz A, Karaman Erdur S, Atalay K, Atalay K, Gurez C. The Role of Ocular Response Analyzer in Differentiation of Forme Fruste Keratoconus From Corneal Astigmatism. Eye Contact Lens. 2019;45:83-87. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000000541 6.Elsheikh A, Joda A, Abass A, Garway-Heath D. Assessment of the Ocular Response Analyzer as an Instrument for Measurement of Intraocular Pressure and Corneal Biomechanics. Curr Eye Res. 2015;40:1111-1119. https://doi.org/10.3109/02713683.2014.978479 7.Bao F, Huang W, Zhu R, Lu N, Wang Y, Li H, Wu S, Lin H, Wang J, Zheng X, Huang J, Li Y, Wang Q, Elsheikh A. Effectiveness of the Goldmann Applanation Tonometer, the Dynamic Contour Tonometer, the Ocular Response Analyzer and the Corvis ST in Measuring Intraocular Pressure following FS-LASIK. Curr Eye Res. 2020;45:144-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/02713683.2019.1660794 8.Efron N, Brennan NA, Chalmers RL, Jones L, Lau C, Morgan PB, Nichols JJ, Szczotka-Flynn LB, Willcox MD. Thirty years of ‘quiet eye’ with etafilcon A contact lenses. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2020;43(3):285-297.
  3. Shen X, Du J, Sun J, Guo J, Hu X, Wang C. Transparent and UV Blocking Structural Colored Hydrogel for Contact Lenses. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2020;12(35):39639-39648.
  4. Cho P, Boost MV. Daily disposable lenses: the better alternative. Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2012;36:4-12.
  5. Kaushik S, Pandav SS. Ocular Response Analyzer. J Curr https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2003.10.002 Glaucoma Pract. 2012;6:17-19. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-1000