Twenty-four hours intraocular pressure in keratoconic eyes assessed by applanation tonometry and Tono-Pen AVIA
Author:
Corresponding Author:

Rafael Vidal Merola. Rua Santo Ant?nio, 416, Apartamento 604, Centro, Juiz de Fora-MG, CEP:36015-000, Brazil. rafaelmerula@hotmail.com

  • Article
  • | |
  • Metrics
  • |
  • Reference [33]
  • |
  • Related [20]
  • | | |
  • Comments
    Abstract:

    AIM: To assess intraocular pressure (IOP) during the daily curve of intraocular pressure (DCPo) in keratoconic eyes and compare Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), without and with astigmatism correction (nGAT and cGAT) and Tono-Pen AVIA (TPA) assessment methods. METHODS: Thirty-nine keratoconic eyes of 24 patients were assessed. DCPo was evaluated with five IOP measurements; four were performed with a GAT (nGAT and cGAT), and a Tono-Pen AVIA (TPA) at various times throughout the day. RESULTS: Mean IOP DCPo values (mm Hg) were: nGAT, 9.9±2.6; cGAT, 11.3±2.6; TPA 12.3±3.1. Mean IOP DCPo differences (mm Hg) and Spearman’s correlation coefficients were as follows: cGATc-nGAT, 1.32±1.31, rs=0.879 (P<0.01); cGAT-TPA, -1.02±2.08, rs=0.723 (P<0.01); and nGAT-TPA, -2.35±2.23, rs=0.730 (P<0.01). Bland-Altman analysis for agreement between cGAT-TPA and nGAT-TPA mean IOP DCPo measurements revealed a mean difference of 1.02 (95%CI, 0.35-1.70) and 2.35 (95%CI, 1.62-3.07) mm Hg, respectively. Regression analysis yielded the following equation: TPA IOP=5.49+0.775×cGAT-0.015×ACD-0.299×corneal astig matism, which allowed us to infer TPA IOP values from other parameters. CONCLUSION: In keratoconic eyes, IOP peaks of DCPo measurements are identified at 6 a.m., independent of the tonometer. The mean DCPo values are: TPA>cGAT>nGAT. IOP TPA measures are predictive of cGAT values, adjusted according to anterior chamber depth and corneal astigmatism.

    Reference
    1 The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 7. The relationship between control of intraocular pressure and visual field deterioration. The AGIS Investigators. Am J Ophthalmol 2000;130(4):429-440.
    2 Jammal AA, Thompson AC, Mariottoni EB, Estrela T, Shigueoka LS, Berchuck SI, Medeiros FA. Impact of intraocular pressure control on rates of retinal nerve fiber layer loss in a large clinical population. Ophthalmology 2021;128(1):48-57.
    3 Caprioli J, Coleman AL. Intraocular pressure fluctuation a risk factor for visual field progression at low intraocular pressures in the advanced glaucoma intervention study. Ophthalmology 2008;115(7):1123-1129.e3.
    4 Hughes E, Spry P, Diamond J. 24-hour monitoring of intraocular pressure in glaucoma management: a retrospective review. J Glaucoma 2003;12(3):232-236.
    5 Rodrigues LD, Silva MRBDM, Schellini SA, Jorge EN. Intraocular pressure peaks: comparison between the circadian curve, diurnal curve and the 6 a.m. measurement. Arq Bras Oftalmol 2004;67:127-131.
    6 David R, Zangwill L, Briscoe D, Dagan M, Yagev R, Yassur Y. Diurnal intraocular pressure variations: an analysis of 690 diurnal curves. Br J Ophthalmol 1992;76(5):280-283.
    7 Cronemberger S, Silva AC, Calixto N. Importance of intraocular pressure measurement at 6:00 a.m. in bed and in darkness in suspected and glaucomatous patients. Arq Bras Oftalmol 2010;73(4):346-349.
    8 Castro-Luna G, Pérez-Rueda A. A predictive model for early diagnosis of keratoconus. BMC Ophthalmol 2020;20(1):263.
    9 Ozkan HH, Koc M, Kiziltoprak H, Tekin K, Aydemir E. Evaluation of topographic, tomographic, topometric, densitometric, and aberrometric features of cornea with pentacam HR system in subclinical keratoconus. Int Ophthalmol 2021;41(5):1729-1741.
    10 Rabinowitz YS. Keratoconus. Surv Ophthalmol 1998;42(4):297-319.
    11 Ambrósio R Jr, Alonso RS, Luz A, Coca Velarde LG. Corneal-thickness spatial profile and corneal-volume distribution: tomographic indices to detect keratoconus. J Cataract Refract Surg 2006;32(11):1851-1859.
    12 Sedaghat MR, Momeni-Moghaddam H, Ambrósio R Jr, Heidari HR, Maddah N, Danesh Z, Sabzi F. Diagnostic ability of corneal shape and biomechanical parameters for detecting frank keratoconus. Cornea 2018;37(8):1025-1034.
    13 Zhao Y, Shen Y, Yan ZP, Tian M, Zhao J, Zhou XT. Relationship among corneal stiffness, thickness, and biomechanical parameters measured by corvis ST, pentacam and ORA in keratoconus. Front Physiol 2019;10:740.
    14 de Sanctis U, Missolungi A, Mutani B, Richiardi L, Grignolo FM. Reproducibility and repeatability of central corneal thickness measurement in keratoconus using the rotating Scheimpflug camera and ultrasound pachymetry. Am J Ophthalmol 2007;144(5):712-718.
    15 Uçakhan OO, Ozkan M, Kanpolat A. Corneal thickness measurements in normal and keratoconic eyes: Pentacam comprehensive eye scanner versus noncontact specular microscopy and ultrasound pachymetry. J Cataract Refract Surg 2006;32(6):970-977.
    16 Rocha-de-Lossada C, Prieto-Godoy M, Sánchez-González JM, Romano V, Borroni D, Rachwani-Anil R, Alba-Linero C, Peraza-Nieves J, Kaye SB, Rodríguez-Calvo-de-Mora M. Tomographic and aberrometric assessment of first-time diagnosed paediatric keratoconus based on age ranges: a multicentre study. Acta Ophthalmol 2021;99(6):e929-e936.
    17 Rechichi M, Mazzotta C, Oliverio GW, Romano V, Borroni D, Ferrise M, Bagaglia S, Jacob S, Meduri A. Selective transepithelial ablation with simultaneous accelerated corneal crosslinking for corneal regularization of keratoconus: stare-X protocol. J Cataract Refract Surg 2021;47(11):1403-1410.
    18 Pagano L, Gadhvi KA, Borroni D, Iselin KC, Vinciguerra R, Tzamalis A, Kaye SB, Romano V. Bilateral keratoconus progression: immediate versus delayed sequential bilateral corneal cross-linking. J Refract Surg 2020;36(8):552-556.
    19 Whitacre MM, Stein R. Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers. Surv Ophthalmol 1993;38(1):1-30.
    20 Goldich Y, Barkana Y, Avni I, Zadok D. Goldmann applanation tonometry versus ocular response analyzer for intraocular pressure measurements in keratoconic eyes. Cornea 2010;29(9):1011-1015.
    21 Özcura F, Y?ld?r?m N, Tambova E, ?ahin A. Evaluation of Goldmann applanation tonometry, rebound tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in keratoconus. J Optom 2017;10(2):117-122.
    22 Mendez-Hernandez C, Arribas-Pardo P, Cuiña-Sardiña R, Fernandez-Perez C, Mendez-Fernandez R, Saenz-Frances F, Benitez-Del-Castillo JM, Garcia-Feijoo J. Measuring intraocular pressure in patients with keratoconus with and without intrastromal corneal ring segments. J Glaucoma 2017;26(1):71-76.
    23 Arribas-Pardo P, Mendez-Hernandez C, Cuiña-Sardiña R, Benitez-Del-Castillo JM, Garcia-Feijoo J. Tonometry after intrastromal corneal ring segments for keratoconus. Optom Vis Sci 2017;94(10):986-992.
    24 Gkika MG, Labiris G, Kozobolis VP. Tonometry in keratoconic eyes before and after riboflavin/UVA corneal collagen crosslinking using three different tonometers. Eur J Ophthalmol 2012;22(2):142-152.
    25 Feizi S, Hashemloo A, Rastegarpour A. Comparison of the ocular response analyzer and 潴晨?椠湇瑯牬慤潭捡畮汮愠牡?灰牬敡獮獡畴物敯?椠湴?歮敯牭慥瑴潥捲漠湦畯獲???污楳湵?佩据穧渠慩????は?????ㄠ??????????????戠牤?????牮潴湥敲浩扯敲爠杬敡牭?卬???甠楫浥慲牡敯獰??即???愠汉楮硶瑥潳?丠???慴汨楡硬瑭潯??????湓瑣物愠漲挰由氱愻爵′瀨爸攩猺猵甸爸攷?愵游搹?漮挼畢汲愾爲?爠楂杩楬摧楥瓧礠?慄昬琠敁牴???卹?????狶煺??爠懖猬?佇曼瑲慳汯浹漠汈?㈠あど?????????????????扎爮?????物潮牦慬?剥???攠汯汦愠浣祯?????甠獧瑥楯湭?????灡灬氠慡湮慤琠楢潩湯?瑥潣湨潡浮敩瑣牡祬??慲?捰潥浲灴慩牥楳猠潯湮?潴景?瑯桭敥?偲敹爠歲楥湡獤?桮慧湳搠桩敮氠摫?慲湡摴??潯汮摩浣愠湥湹?獳氮椠瑉?汴愠浏灰?浴潨畡湬瑭敯摬?洲攰琲栰漻搴猰???氺椠游?伹瀭核琵样愮氼浢潲氾′????????く????の??戠片????佡穧扲敩欠?娬???潧桬敥湴??????慣浨浯敬牬猠浈楐瑎栬?????剩慯灵畦慡湳漠??????祲湡慯浣極捬?捲漠湰瑲潥畳牳?瑲潥渠潥浬敥瑶牡祴??慮?湩敮眠?睥慲祡?瑯潣?慮獵獳攠獷獩?楨渠瑣牯慥潸捩畳汴慩牮?瀠牰敳獥獵畤牯敥?楦湯?敩捡瑴慩瑯楮挠?捬潡牵湣敯慭獡???潯牷渠敩慭??ひぴ?????????????????戠牯??ね?啡湳瑵敲牥汭慥畮晴琿?????匠捍桯摢汬攠?乵???慨獥灩敬牫???‰?氰椻渲欳?吨???攳改爲氭椳渹朵?????漲洸瀠慔牯極獢潯湵?漠晄?搠祒湯慢浥楲捴?挠潃測琠潋痩牲?瑵潴湲潥浴攠瑊爬礠?慡湲摲??潃氬搠浍慡湵湲?慣灥瀭汔慩湳慯瑮椠潓測?瑓潡湵潢浵敳瑳牥礠?椬渠?歯敬物慮琠潊挮漠湃畯獲???潡牴湩敯慮?㈠ぢ????づ?ㄠっ???づ????べ???resis, intraocular pressure, and corneal central pachymetry. J Cataract Refract Surg 2008;34(4):616-622.
    29 Mollan SP, Wolffsohn JS, Nessim M, Laiquzzaman M, Sivakumar S, Hartley S, Shah S. Accuracy of Goldmann, ocular response analyser, Pascal and TonoPen XL tonometry in keratoconic and normal eyes. Br J Ophthalmol 2008;92(12):1661-1665.
    30 Read SA, Collins MJ. Intraocular pressure in keratoconus. Acta Ophthalmol 2011;89(4):358-364.
    31 Altinkaynak H, Kocasarac C, Dundar H, Sayin N, Kara N, Bozkurt E, Duru N. Which tonometry in eyes with keratoconus? Eye (Lond) 2016;30(3):431-437.
    32 Rosentreter A, Athanasopoulos A, Schild AM, Lappas A, Cursiefen C, Dietlein TS. Rebound, applanation, and dynamic contour tonometry in pathologic corneas. Cornea 2013;32(3):313-318.
    33 Kanellopoulos AJ, Asimellis G. Revisiting keratoconus diagnosis and progression classification based on evaluation of corneal asymmetry indices, derived from Scheimpflug imaging in keratoconic and suspect cases. Clin Ophthalmol 2013;7:1539-1548.
    34 Maheshwari R, S Choudhari N, Deep Singh M. Tonometry and care of tonometers. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2012;6(3):124-130.
    35 Jung Y, Hu JH. A K-fold averaging Cross-validation procedure. J Nonparametr Stat 2015;27(2):167-179.
    36 Iwaszkiewicz E. Diurnal fluctuations
    Cited by
    Comments
    Comments
    分享到微博
    Submit
Get Citation

Rafael Vidal Merola, Sebastiao Cronemberger, Artur William Veloso,/et al.Twenty-four hours intraocular pressure in keratoconic eyes assessed by applanation tonometry and Tono-Pen AVIA. Int J Ophthalmol, 2022,15(1):52-58

Copy
Share
Article Metrics
  • Abstract:469
  • PDF: 716
  • HTML: 0
  • Cited by: 0
Publication History
  • Received:March 27,2021
  • Revised:July 27,2021
  • Online: January 18,2022