Evaluation of the Ocular Response Analyzer in ocular hypertension, glaucoma, and normal populations. Prospective study on 329 eyes;Évaluation des facteurs biomécaniques cornéens mesurés à l'Ocular Response Analyzer dans l'hypertension intraoculaire, le glaucome primitif à angle ouvert et chez le sujet normal. Étude prospective sur 329 yeux

Journal Francais d'Ophtalmologie

Volumn 31, Issue 10, 2008, Pages 953-960

  Streho, M ^a   Dariel, R ^a   Giraud, J M ^a   Verret, C ^a   Fenolland, J R ^a   Crochelet, O ^a   May, F ^a   Maurin, J F ^a   Renard, J P ^a  

^a University of Paris Descartes   (France)

Author keywords

Corneal biomechanics; Corneal hysteresis; Glaucoma; Intraocular pressure; IOP; Ocular Response Analyzer; ORA; Pachymetry

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRAOCULAR HYPERTENSION; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OCULOPLETHYSMOGRAPHY; OPEN ANGLE GLAUCOMA; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REFERENCE VALUE;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA, OPEN-ANGLE; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OCULAR HYPERTENSION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REFERENCE VALUES; TONOMETRY, OCULAR; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 58149139138     PISSN: 01815512     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0181-5512(08)74740-5     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. European Glaucoma Society Terminology and Guidelines for Glaucoma. Savona, Italy: Dogma Srl; 2003.
2. Kass MA, Gordon MO. Intraocular pressure and visual field progression in open-angle glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol, 2000;130:490-1.
3. Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Hussein M. Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol, 2002;120:1268-79.
4. Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, Johnson CA, et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120:714-20.
5. Goldmann H, Schmidt T. Applanation tonometry. Ophthalmologica, 1957;134:221-42.
6. Kotecha A. What biomechanical properties of the cornea are relevant for the clinician? Surv Ophthalmol, 2007;52:109-14.
7. Herndon LW. Measuring intraocular pressure-adjustments for corneal thickness and new technologies. Curr Opin Ophthalmol, 2006;17:115-9.
8. Ehlers N, Hansen FK, Aasved H. Biometric correlations of corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh), 1975;53:652-9.
9. Doughty MJ, Zaman ML. Human corneal thickness and its impact on intraocular pressure measures: a review and metaanlysis approach. Surv Ophthalmol, 2000;44:367-408.
10. Liu J, Roberts CJ. Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurement: quantitative analysis. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2005;31:146-55.
11. Edmund C. Corneal elasticity and ocular rigidity in normal and keratoconic eyes. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh), 1998;66:134-40.
12. Touboul D, Roberts C, Kérautret J, Garra C, Maurice-Tison S, Saubusse E, Colin J. Correlations between corneal hysteresis, intraocular pressure, and corneal central pachymetry. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2008;34:616-22.
13. Maurice DM. Mechanics of the cornea. In: The Cornea : Transactions of the World Congress on the Cornea III. Cavanagh DH (ed), New York, NY, Raven Press Ltd, 1988:187-93.
14. Muller LJ, Pels E, Vrensen GF. The specific architecture of the anterior stroma accounts for maintenance of corneal curvature. Br J Ophthalmol, 2001;85:437-43.
15. Luce DA. Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular reponse analyzer. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2005;31:156-62.
16. Montard R, Kopito R, Touzeau O, Allouch C, Letaief I, Borderie V, Laroche L. Ocular Response Analayzer: etude de fiabilité et de correlation sur des yeux normaux. J Fr Ophtalmol, 2007;30:978-84.
17. Luce DA, Taylor D. Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer: Measures corneal biomechanical properties and IOP. 2006.
18. Shah S, Laiquzzaman M, Cunliffe I, Mantry S. The use of the Reichert ocular response analyzer to establish the relationship between ocular hysteresis, corneal resistance factor and central corneal thickness in normal eyes. Cont Lens Anterior Eye, 2006;29:257-62.
19. Congdon NG, Broman AT, Bandeen-Roche K, Grover D, Quigley HA. Central corneal thickness and corneal hysteresis associated with glaucoma damage. Am J Ophthalmol, 2006;141:868-75.
20. Bochmann F, Ang GS, Azuara-Blanco A. Lower corneal hysteresis in glaucoma patients with acquired pit of the optic nerve (APON). Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 2008;246:735-8.
21. Kirwan C, O'Keefe M, Lanigan B. Corneal hysteresis and intraocular pressure measurement in children using the reichert ocular response analyzer. Am J Ophthalmol, 2006;142:990-2.
22. Pepose JS, Feigenbaum SK, Qazi MA, Sanderson JP, Roberts CJ. Changes in corneal biomechanics and intraocular pressure following LASIK using static, dynamic and noncontact tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol 2007;143:39-47.
23. Martinez-de-la-Casa JM, Garcia-Feijoo J, Fernandez-Vidal A, Mendez-Hernandez C, Garcia-Sanchez J. Ocular response analyzer versus Goldmann applantion tonometry for intraocular pressure measurements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2006;47:4410-4.
24. Medeiros FA, Weinreb RN. Evaluation of the influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurements using the ocular response analyzer. J Glaucoma, 2006;15:364-70.
25. Hoeltzel DA, Altman P, Buzard K, Choe K. Strip extensiometry for comparison of the mechanical response of bovine, rabbit, and human corneas. J Biomech Eng, 1992;114:202-15.