Journal of The Korean Ophthalmological Society (대한안과학회지)

The Korean Ophthalmological Society (대한안과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Clinical Evaluation of a Rebound Tonometer in Patients Who Underwent Penetrating Keratoplasty

전층각막이식을 시행한 안에서 리바운드 안압계의 임상적 유용성

  • Kim, Jong Woo (Department of Ophthalmology, Inha University School of Medicine) ;
  • Jung, Ji Won (Department of Ophthalmology, Inha University School of Medicine)
  • 김종우 (인하대학교 의과대학 안과학교실) ;
  • 정지원 (인하대학교 의과대학 안과학교실)
  • Received : 2018.05.03
  • Accepted : 2018.11.27
  • Published : 2018.12.15
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the measurements of the rebound tonometer (RT), Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) and noncontact tonometer (NCT) in patients who underwent penetrating keratoplasty (PKP), and to evaluate the reproducibility of the RT measurements. Methods: This study included 19 PKP eyes and 28 normal eyes. We compared the intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements of the GAT and NCT with the RT in both groups using Spearman's correlation analysis and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The IOP, as measured with an RT in each group, was assessed with respect to reproducibility using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: In normal eyes, there was no significant difference in the measurements obtained with the RT, GAT, and NCT (p > 0.050). In the patient group, the RT measurements were not significantly different from those of the GAT (p = 0.872), but they were significantly lower than those obtained with the NCT (p = 0.011). However, the RT measurements showed a relatively high correlation with those of the GAT and NCT (r = 0.770 and 0.879, respectively). The ICC of the RT was 0.986 for the PKP eye group and 0.961 for the normal eye group, both of which were highly reproducible. Conclusions: In PKP eyes, the measurements obtained with the RT showed a relatively high correlation with those of the GAT and NCT, and the repeatability of the RT measurements was high and similar to those for normal eyes. The RT can therefore be considered a useful method for measuring the IOP in PKP eyes.

목적: 전층각막이식을 시행받은 환자에서 리바운드 안압계의 임상적 유용성을 골드만 안압계 및 비접촉 안압계와 비교하여 알아보고자 하였다. 대상과 방법: 전층각막이식을 시행한 19안, 정상 대상자의 28안을 대상으로 하였다. 전층각막이식을 시행한 안과 정상안 각각에서 리바운드 안압계로 측정한 안압 결과를 골드만 안압계와 비접촉 안압계로 측정한 결과와 Spearmann 상관분석을 시행하고 Wilcoxon signed rank test 검정을 사용하여 비교하였다. 또한 각 그룹에서 리바운드 안압계로 측정한 안압 결과를 급내상관계수를 이용하여 재현성을 평가하였다. 결과: 정상안에서는 리바운드 안압계로 측정한 결과가 골드만 및 비접촉 안압계로 측정한 결과값과 유의한 차이가 없었다(p>0.050). 전층각막이식을 시행한 안에서는 리바운드 안압계로 측정한 안압은 골드만 안압계로 측정한 안압과 유의한 차이를 보이지 않았으나(p=0.872), 비접촉 안압계로 측정한 안압에 비하여 유의하게 낮았다(p=0.011). 하지만 리바운드 안압계로 측정한 안압과 골드만 및 비접촉 안압계로 측정한 안압은 비교적 높은 상관성을 보였다(r=0.770, 0.879). 리바운드 안압계 측정치의 급내상관계수는 전층각막 이식을 시행한 안에서는 0.986, 정상안에서는 0.961로 두 군 모두 높은 재현성을 보였다. 결론: 전층각막이식을 시행한 안에서 리바운드 안압계 측정값은 골드만 및 비접촉 안압계 측정값과 비교적 높은 상관성을 보였으며 정상안과 유사하게 높은 재현성을 보여 이들 환자의 안압 측정에 있어서 유용한 방법 중 하나로 생각해 볼 수 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Foulks GN. Glaucoma associated with penetrating keratoplasty. Ophthalmology 1987;94:871-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(87)33542-0
  2. Goldberg DB, Schanzlin DJ, Brown SI. Incidence of increased intraocularpressure after keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 1981;92:372-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9394(81)90527-4
  3. Irvine AR, Kaufman HE. Intraocular pressure following penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 1969;68:835-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9394(69)94577-2
  4. Kohlhaas M, Boehm AG, Spoerl E, et al. Effect of central corneal thickness, corneal curvature, and axial length on applanation tonometry. Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:471-6. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.124.4.471
  5. Liu J, Roberts CJ. Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurement: quantitative analysis. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005;31:146-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.09.031
  6. Broman AT, Congdon NG, Bandeen-Roche K, Quigley HA. Influence of corneal structure, corneal responsiveness, and other ocular parameters on tonometric measurement of intraocular pressure. J Glaucoma 2007;16:581-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e3180640f40
  7. Kageyama M, Hirooka K, Baba T, Shiraga F. Comparison of ICare rebound tonometer with noncontact tonometer in healthy children. J Glaucoma 2011;20:63-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181d12dc4
  8. Pakrou N, Gray T, Mills R, et al. Clinical comparison of the Icare tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometry. J Glaucoma 2008;17:43-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e318133fb32
  9. Shields MB. The non-contact tonometer. Its value and limitations. Surv Ophthalmol 1980;24:211-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0039-6257(80)90042-9
  10. Vernon SA. Intra-eye pressure range and pulse profiles in normal with the Pulsair non-contact tonometer. Eye (Lond) 1993;7(Pt 1):134-7. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.1993.28
  11. Zhang Y, Zhao JL, Bian AL, et al. Effects of central corneal thickness and corneal curvature on measurement of intraocular pressure with Goldmann applanation tonometer and non-contact tonometer. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi 2009;45:713-8.
  12. Moreno-Montanes J, Gosende I, Caire J, Garcia-Granero M. Comparation of the new rebound tonometer IOPen and the Goldmann tonometer, and their relationship to corneal properties. Eye (Lond) 2011;25:50-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2010.137
  13. Sahin A, Basmak H, Niyaz L, Yildirim N. Reproducibility and tolerability of the ICare rebound tonometer in school children. J Glaucoma 2007;16:185-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e31802fc6bc
  14. Moreno-Montanes J, Olmo N, Zarranz-Ventura J, Heras-Mulero H. Dynamic contour tonometry in eyes after penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea 2009;28:836-7.
  15. Rao VJ, Gnanaraj L, Mitchell KW, Figueiredo FC. Clinical comparison of ocular blood flow tonometer, Tonopen, and Goldmann applanation tonometer for measuring intraocular pressure in postkeratoplasty eyes. Cornea 2001;20:834-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003226-200111000-00011
  16. Shemesh G, Waisbourd M, Varssano D, et al. Measurements of intraocular pressure by Goldmann tonometry, Tonopen XL, and the transpalpebral tonometer, TGDc-01, after penetrating keratoplasty: a comparative study. Cornea 2009;28:724-28. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0b013e3181930be8
  17. Geyer O, Mayron Y, Loewenstein A, et al. Tono-Pen tonometry in normal and in post-keratoplasty eyes. Br J Ophthalmol 1992;76:538-40. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.76.9.538
  18. Kirkness CM, Ficker LA. Risk factors for the development of postkeratoplasty glaucoma. Cornea 1992;11:427-32. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003226-199209000-00012
  19. Fan JC, Chow K, Patel DV, McGhee CN. Corticosteroid-induced intraocular pressure elevation in keratoconus is common following uncomplicated penetrating keratoplasty. Eye (Lond) 2009;23:2056-62. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2008.413
  20. Holladay JT, Allison ME, Prager TC. Goldmann applanation tonometry in patients with regular corneal astigmatism. Am J Ophthalmol 1983;96:90-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9394(83)90459-2
  21. Rask G, Behndig A. Effects of corneal thickness, curvature, astigmatism and direction of gaze on Goldmann applanation tonometry readings. Ophthalmic Res 2006;38:49-55. https://doi.org/10.1159/000089762
  22. Matsumoto T, Makino H, Uozato H, et al. The influence of corneal thickness and curvature on the difference between intraocular pressure measurements obtained with a non-contact tonometer and those with a Goldmann applanation tonometer. Jpn J Ophthalmol 2000;44:691.
  23. Babalola OE, Kehinde AV, Iloegbunam AC, et al. A comparison of the Goldmann applanation and non-contact (Keeler Pulsair EasyEye) tonometers and the effect of central corneal thickness in indigenous indigenous African eyes. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2009;29:182-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2008.00621.x
  24. Moreno-Montanes J, Garcia N, Fernandez-Hortelano A, Garcia-Layana A. Rebound tonometer compared with goldmann tonometer in normal and pathologic corneas. Cornea 2007;26:427-30. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0b013e318030df6e
  25. Scuderi GL, Cascone NC, Regine F, et al. Validity and limits of the rebound tonometer (ICare[R]): clinical study. Eur J Ophthalmol 2011;21:251-7. https://doi.org/10.5301/EJO.2010.3712
  26. Jorge J, Fernandes P, Queiros A, et al. Comparison of the IOPenand iCare rebound tonometers with the Goldmann tonometer in a normal population. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2010;30:108-12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2009.00697.x
  27. Poostchi A, Mitchell R, Nicholas S, et al. The iCare rebound tonometer: comparisons with Goldmann tonometry, and influence of central corneal thickness. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2009;37:687-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9071.2009.02109.x
  28. Martinez-de-la-Casa JM, Jimenez-Santos M, Saenz-Frances F, et al. Performance of the rebound, noncontact and Goldmann applanation tonometers in routine clinical practice. Acta Ophthalmol 2011;89:676-80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-3768.2009.01774.x
  29. Nakamura M, Darhad U, Tatsumi Y, et al. Agreement of rebound tonometer in measuring intraocular pressure with three types of applanation tonometers. Am J Ophthalmol 2006;142:332-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2006.02.035
  30. Salvetat ML, Zeppieri M, Miani F, et al. Comparison of ICare tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometry in normal corneas and in eyes with automated lamellar and penetrating keratoplasty. Eye (Lond) 2011;25:642-50. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2011.60
  31. Brusini P, Salvetat ML, Zeppieri M, et al. Comparison of ICare tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients. J Glaucoma 2006;15:213-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ijg.0000212208.87523.66
  32. Davies LN, Bartlett H, Mallen EA, Wolffsohn JS. Clinical evaluation of rebound tonometer. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2006;84:206-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0420.2005.00610.x