Goldmann and error correcting tonometry prisms compared to intracameral pressure
Affiliation
Univ Arizona, Coll Opt Sci LLC, Coll Med, Dept Ophthalmol Intuor TechnolUniv Arizona, Coll Med, Dept Ophthalmol
Univ Arizona, Coll Optic Sci, Dept Ophthalmol
Univ Arizona, Coll Engn, Dept Aerosp & Mech
Issue Date
2018-01-04Keywords
GlaucomaIntraocular pressure
IOP
Goldmann
Bias
Error
Perkins
Tonometer
Applanation
CCT
Central corneal thickness
CRF
Corneal resistance factor
Intracameral
Cadaver eye
In vivo
In vitro
Head position
Upright
Supine
Manometric
Corneal hydration
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
BIOMED CENTRAL LTDCitation
Goldmann and error correcting tonometry prisms compared to intracameral pressure 2018, 18 (1) BMC OphthalmologyJournal
BMC OphthalmologyRights
© The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Background: Compare Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) prism and correcting applanation tonometry surface (CATS) prism to intracameral intraocular pressure (IOP), in vivo and in vitro. Methods: Pressure transducer intracameral IOP was measured on fifty-eight (58) eyes undergoing cataract surgery and the IOP was modulated manometrically to 10, 20, and 40 mmHg. Simultaneously, IOP was measured using a Perkins tonometer with a standard GAT prism and a CATS prism at each of the intracameral pressures. Statistical comparison was made between true intracameral pressures and the two prism measurements. Differences between the two prism measurements were correlated to central corneal thickness (CCT) and corneal resistance factor (CRF). Human cadaver eyes were used to assess measurement repeatability. Results: The CATS tonometer prism measured closer to true intracameral IOP than the GAT prism by 1.7+/-2.7 mmHg across all pressures and corneal properties. The difference in CATS and GAT measurements was greater in thin CCT corneas (2.7+/-1.9 mmHg) and low resistance (CRF) corneas (2.8+/-2.1 mmHg). The difference in prisms was negligible at high CCT and CRF values. No difference was seen in measurement repeatability between the two prisms. Conclusion: A CATS prism in Goldmann tonometer armatures significantly improve the accuracy of IOP measurement compared to true intracameral pressure across a physiologic range of IOP values. The CATS prism is significantly more accurate compared to the GAT prism in thin and less rigid corneas. The in vivo intracameral study validates mathematical models and clinical findings in IOP measurement between the GAT and CATS prisms.ISSN
1471-2415PubMed ID
29301514Version
Final published versionSponsors
NIH SBIR Grant [R43 EY026821-01]; Arizona Eye Consultants, Tucson, AZ; Abbott Medical Opticsae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1186/s12886-017-0668-z
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.