Measuring intraocular pressure

Current Opinion in Ophthalmology

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 103-109

  Okafor, Kingsley C ^a   Brandt, James D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Central corneal thickness; Corneal hysteresis; Glaucoma; Intraocular pressure; Tonometry

Indexed keywords

ANALYZER; APPLANATION TONOMETER; DYNAMIC CONTOUR TONOMETRY; DYNAMICS; GOLDMANN APPLANATION TONOMETRY; HAND HELD TONOMETRY DEVICE; HUMAN; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MACKAY MARG APPLANATION TONOMETRY; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; NONHUMAN; OCULAR RESPONSE ANALYZER; PRESSURE TRANSDUCER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REBOUND TONOMETRY; REVIEW; TONOMETRY; TRANSPALPEBRAL TONOMETRY; TWENTY FOUR HOUR CONTINUOUS TONOMETRY; WIRELESS INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE TRANSDUCER; CORNEA; DEVICES; ELASTICITY; GLAUCOMA; OCULOPLETHYSMOGRAPHY; PHYSIOLOGY;

CORNEA; ELASTICITY; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; TONOMETRY, OCULAR;

EID: 84926213545     PISSN: 10408738     EISSN: 15317021     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000129     Document Type: Review

References (62)

1. Brandt JD. The myth of clinical precision. Ophthalmology 2009; 116:1-2; e1.
2. Goldmann H, Schmidt T. Über applanationstonometrie. Ophthalmologica 1957; 134:221-242.
3. Whitacre MM, Stein R. Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers. Surv Ophthalmol 1993; 38:1-30.
4. Ehlers N, Bramsen T, Sperling S. Applanation tonometry and central corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1975; 53:34-43.
5. Kohlhaas M, Boehm AG, Spoerl E, et al. Effect of central corneal thickness, corneal curvature, and axial length on applanation tonometry. Arch Ophthalmol 2006; 124:471-476.
6. Feltgen N, Leifert D, Funk J. Correlation between central corneal thickness, applanation tonometry, and direct intracameral IOP readings. Br J Ophthalmol 2001; 85:85-87.
7. La Rosa FA, Gross RL, Orengo-Nania S. Central corneal thickness of Caucasians and African Americans in glaucomatous and nonglaucomatous populations. Arch Ophthalmol 2001; 119:23-27.
8. Brandt JD, Beiser JA, Kass MA, Gordon MO. Central corneal thickness in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS). Ophthalmology 2001; 108:1779-1788.
9. Foster PJ, Baasanhu J, Alsbirk PH, et al. Central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure in a Mongolian population. Ophthalmology 1998; 105:969-973.
10. Copt RP, Thomas R, Mermoud A. Corneal thickness in ocular hypertension, primary open-angle glaucoma, and normal tension glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1999; 117:14-16.
11. Ehlers N, Hansen FK. Central corneal thickness in low-tension glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1974; 52:740-746.
12. Doughty MJ, Zaman ML. Human corneal thickness and its impact on intraocular pressure measures: a review and meta-analysis approach. Surv Ophthalmol 2000; 44:367-408.
13. Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2002; 120:714-720.
14. Chang DH, Stulting RD. Change in intraocular pressure measurements after LASIK: the effect of the refractive correction and the lamellar flap. Ophthalmology 2005; 112:1009-1016.
15. Choudhari NS, George R, Baskaran M, et al. Measurement of Goldmann applanation tonometer calibration error. Ophthalmology 2009; 116:3-8.
16. Choudhari NS, Jadhav V, George R, Vijaya L. Variability in the calibration error of the goldmann applanation tonometer. J Glaucoma 2011; 20:492-496.
17. Tonnu PA, Ho T, Newson T, et al. The influence of central corneal thickness and age on intraocular pressure measured by pneumotonometry, noncontact tonometry, the Tono-Pen XL, and Goldmann applanation tonometry. Br J Ophthalmol 2005; 89:851-854.
18. Ito K, Tawara A, Kubota T, Harada Y. IOP measured by dynamic contour tonometry correlates with IOP measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry and noncontact tonometry in Japanese individuals. J Glaucoma 2012; 21:35-40.
19. Yaoeda K, Shirakashi M, Fukushima A, et al. Measurement of intraocular pressure using the NT-4000: a new noncontact tonometer equipped with pulse synchronous measurement function. J Glaucoma 2005; 14:201-205.
20. Vincent SJ, Vincent RA, Shields D, Lee GA. Comparison of intraocular pressure measurement between rebound, noncontact and Goldmann applanation tonometry in treated glaucoma patients. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2012; 40:e163-170.
21. Schiano Lomoriello D, Lombardo M, Tranchina L, et al. Repeatability of intraocular pressure and central corneal thickness measurements provided by a noncontact method of tonometry and pachymetry. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2011; 249:429-434.
22. Kotecha A. What biomechanical properties of the cornea are relevant for the clinician? Surv Ophthalmol 2007; 52 (Suppl 2):S109-S114.
23. Sullivan-Mee M, Lewis SE, Pensyl D, et al. Factors influencing intermethod agreement between goldmann applanation, pascal dynamic contour, and ocular response analyzer tonometry. J Glaucoma 2013; 22:487-495.
24. Kotecha A, White E, Schlottmann PG, Garway-Heath DF. Intraocular pressure measurement precision with the Goldmann applanation, dynamic contour, and ocular response analyzer tonometers. Ophthalmology 2010; 117:730-737.
25. Sullivan-Mee M, Gerhardt G, Halverson KD, Qualls C. Repeatability and reproducibility for intraocular pressure measurement by dynamic contour, ocular response analyzer, and goldmann applanation tonometry. J Glaucoma 2009; 18:666-673.
26. Xu G, Lam DS, Leung CK. Influence of ocular pulse amplitude on ocular response analyzer measurements. J Glaucoma 2011; 20:344-349.
27. De Moraes CV, Hill V, Tello C, et al. Lower corneal hysteresis is associated with more rapid glaucomatous visual field progression. J Glaucoma 2012; 21:209-213.
28. Anand A, De Moraes CG, Teng CC, et al. Corneal hysteresis and visual field asymmetry in open angle glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2010; 51:6514-6518.
29. Freeman EE, Roy-Gagnon MH, Descovich D, et al. The heritability of glaucoma-related traits corneal hysteresis, central corneal thickness, intraocular pressure, and choroidal blood flow pulsatility. PLoS One 2013; 8:e55573.
30. Kirwan C, O'Malley D, O'Keefe M. Corneal hysteresis and corneal resistance factor in keratoectasia: findings using the Reichert ocular response analyzer. Ophthalmologica 2008; 222:334-337.
31. Mollan SP, Wolffsohn JS, Nessim M, et al. Accuracy of Goldmann, ocular response analyser, Pascal and TonoPen XL tonometry in keratoconic and normal eyes. Br J Ophthalmol 2008; 92:1661-1665.
32. Kanngiesser HE, Kniestedt C, Robert YC. Dynamic contour tonometry: presentation of a new tonometer. J Glaucoma 2005; 14:344-350.
33. Duba I, Wirthlin AC. Dynamic contour tonometry for post-LASIK intraocular pressure measurements. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 2004; 221:347-350.
34. Kaufmann C, Bachmann LM, Thiel MA. Intraocular pressure measurements using dynamic contour tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003; 44:3790-3794.
35. Ceruti P, Morbio R, Marraffa M, Marchini G. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and goldmann applanation tonometry in deep lamellar and penetrating keratoplasties. Am J Ophthalmol 2008; 145:215-221.
36. Wang AS, Alencar LM, Weinreb RN, et al. Repeatability and Reproducibility of Goldmann Applanation, Dynamic Contour, and Ocular Response Analyzer Tonometry. J Glaucoma 2013; 22:127-132.
37. Anderson MF, Agius-Fernandez A, Kaye SB. Comparison of the utility of Pascal dynamic contour tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry in routine clinical practice. J Glaucoma 2013; 22:422-426.
38. Mackay RS, Marg E, Oechsli R. Automatic tonometer with exact theory: various biological applications. Science 1960; 131:1668-1669.
39. Kim NR, Kim CY, Kim H, et al. Comparison of goldmann applanation tonometer, noncontact tonometer, and TonoPen XL for intraocular pressure measurement in different types of glaucomatous, ocular hypertensive, and normal eyes. Curr Eye Res 2011; 36:295-300.
40. Iester M, Mermoud A, Achache F, Roy S. New Tonopen XL: comparison with the Goldmann tonometer. Eye (Lond) 2001; 15:52-58.
41. Amaral WO, Teixeira RM, Alencar LM, et al. Central and peripheral corneal thickness: influence on the iop measurement by Tonopen. Arq Bras Oftalmol 2006; 69:41-45.
42. Li Y, Shi J, Duan X, Fan F. Transpalpebral measurement of intraocular pressure using the Diaton tonometer versus standard Goldmann applanation tonometry. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2010; 248:1765-1770.
43. Toker MI, Vural A, Erdogan H, et al. Central corneal thickness and Diaton transpalpebral tonometry. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2008; 246:881-889.
44. Doherty MD, Carrim ZI, O'Neill DP. Diaton tonometry: an assessment of validity and preference against Goldmann tonometry. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2012; 40:e171-e175.
45. Bali SJ, Bhartiya S, Sobti A, et al. Comparative evaluation of Diaton and Goldmann applanation tonometers. Ophthalmologica 2012; 228:42-46.
46. Kontiola AI. A new induction-based impact method for measuring intraocular pressure. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2000; 78:142-145.
47. Kontiola A. A new electromechanical method for measuring intraocular pressure. Doc Ophthalmol 1996; 93:265-276.
48. Sahin A, Basmak H, Niyaz L, Yildirim N. Reproducibility and tolerability of the ICare rebound tonometerinschool children. JGlaucoma 2007; 16:185-188.
49. 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; 25:436-440.
50. Sahin A, Niyaz L, Yildirim N. Comparison of the rebound tonometer with the Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2007; 35:335-339.
51. Dahlmann-Noor AH, Puertas R, Tabasa-Lim S, et al. Comparison of handheld rebound tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry in children with glaucoma: a cohort study. BMJ Open 2013; 3:e001788.
52. Kageyama M, Hirooka K, Baba T, Shiraga F. Comparison of ICare rebound tonometer with noncontact tonometer in healthy children. J Glaucoma 2011; 20:63-66.
53. Flemmons MS, Hsiao YC, Dzau J, et al. Icare rebound tonometry in children with known and suspected glaucoma. J AAPOS 2011; 15:153-157.
54. Lambert SR, Melia M, Buffenn AN, et al. Rebound tonometry in children: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 2013; 120:e21-e27.
55. Sakamoto M, Kanamori A, Fujihara M, et al. Assessment of IcareONE rebound tonometer for self-measuring intraocular pressure. Acta Ophthalmol 2014; 92:243-248.
56. Moreno-Montanes J, Martinez-de-la-Casa JM, Sabater AL, et al. Clinical Evaluation of the New Rebound Tonometers Icare PRO and Icare ONE Compared With the Goldmann Tonometer. J Glaucoma 2014. [Epub on Journal website, no further details of publication]
57. Gandhi NG, Prakalapakorn SG, El-Dairi MA, et al. Icare ONE rebound versus Goldmann applanation tonometry in children with known or suspected glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 2012; 154:843-849; e1.
58. Leonardi M, Pitchon EM, Bertsch A, et al. Wireless contact lens sensor for intraocular pressure monitoring: assessment on enucleated pig eyes. Acta Ophthalmol 2009; 87:433-437.
59. Mansouri K, Shaarawy T. Continuous intraocular pressure monitoring with a wireless ocular telemetry sensor: initial clinical experience in patients with open angle glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 2011; 95:627-629.
60. Mansouri K, Medeiros FA, Tafreshi A, Weinreb RN. Continuous 24-hour monitoring of intraocular pressure patterns with a contact lens sensor: safety, tolerability, and reproducibility in patients with glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2012; 130:1534-1539.
61. Hollo G, Kothy P, Vargha P. Evaluation of continuous 24-h intraocular pressure monitoring for assessment of prostaglandin-induced pressure reduction in glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2014; 23:e6-e12.
62. Melki S, Todani A, Cherfan G. An implantable intraocular pressure transducer: initial safety outcomes. J Am Med Assoc Ophthalmol 2014; 132:1221-1225.