Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

[Evaluation of dynamic contour tonometry in keratoconus].

Authors: N, Schädle; J D, Unterlauft; T, Klink; G, Geerling;

[Evaluation of dynamic contour tonometry in keratoconus].

Abstract

The gold standard for measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) until now has been Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), which depends on the central corneal thickness (CCT) and curvature. In patients with keratoconus who have an abnormal corneal geometry and thickness, measurement of pressure with GAT is often difficult and not very reproducible. We compared the impact of the central corneal thickness (CCT) on the IOP measured with dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), a digital method which is adapted to the corneal geometry, and GAT in patients with keratoconus.IOP was measured in 54 patients (38 men and 16 women, mean age of 36+/-9.9 years) with GAT and DCT in randomized order. All patients had a keratoconus which was assured by topography. In addition central corneal thickness (CCT) was measured with the Pentacam. For statistical analysis the Pearson correlation was calculated and a Bland-Altman diagram plotted.Mean corneal thickness was 486.2+/-45.5 microm. DCT measured the IOP at a mean value of 14.9+/-2.6 mmHg and GAT at 13.3+/-2.9 mmHg. With a mean difference of 1.6+/-2.4 mmHg DCT measured significantly higher than GAT (p0.05) nor those with DCT (r=0.08; p>0.05) showed a significant correlation to central corneal thickness.The example of keratoconus confirms that IOP measured by GAT is lower than if measured by DCT. Because both methods are independent of the CCT they are equally acceptable for IOP follow-up in eyes with keratoconus, which may result in progressive corneal thinning in the long term.

Keywords

Adult, Male, Tonometry, Ocular, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Female, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Keratoconus, Sensitivity and Specificity

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    5
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
5
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!