Comparison of intraocular pressures after myopic laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy: Tonometry-pachymetry, Goldmann applanation tonometry, dynamic contour tonometry, and noncontact tonometry

Kyung Eun Han, Hyesun Kim, Na Rae Kim, Ikhyun Jun, Eungkweon Kim, Tae-im Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements using a new tonometer-pachymeter device (Tonopachy), Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), and noncontact tonometry (NCT) before and after myopic laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK). Setting: Institute of Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. Design: Prospective comparative observational study. Methods: Nine IOP values were measured using 4 tonometers (6 IOPs by tonometer-pachymeter and 1 each by GAT, DCT, and NCT) and compared preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. Of the 6 IOP values measured by the tonometer-pachymeter, 1 showed uncorrected IOP and 5 indicated central corneal thickness (CCT)-corrected IOPs through different formulas. Results: Preoperatively and postoperatively, the means of 9 IOP values measured by 4 tonometers were statistically different. The IOP measurements by the tonometer-pachymeter correlated with all other IOP values preoperatively; however, there was no correlation with IOP measurements using DCT postoperatively. Some IOPs using the tonometer-pachymeter were interchangeable with those using GAT preoperatively, but not with DCT preoperatively or postoperatively. The corrected IOP values of the tonometer-pachymeter formula 3 and DCT did not change after surgery. The percentage change in CCT and corneal curvature and change in diopters correlated with the percentage change in IOP measurements by GAT and NCT but not with those using DCT and the tonometer-pachymeter. Conclusion: Among the 9 IOP values, corrected IOP using the tonometer-pachymeter formula 3 showed similar IOP values after LASEK, as did DCT. Financial Disclosure: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)888-897
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery
Volume39
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013 Jun 1

Fingerprint

Laser-Assisted Subepithelial Keratectomy
Manometry
Intraocular Pressure
Republic of Korea

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Ophthalmology
  • Sensory Systems

Cite this

@article{60dea951641d40e4afe697ea73bfebdf,
title = "Comparison of intraocular pressures after myopic laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy: Tonometry-pachymetry, Goldmann applanation tonometry, dynamic contour tonometry, and noncontact tonometry",
abstract = "Purpose: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements using a new tonometer-pachymeter device (Tonopachy), Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), and noncontact tonometry (NCT) before and after myopic laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK). Setting: Institute of Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. Design: Prospective comparative observational study. Methods: Nine IOP values were measured using 4 tonometers (6 IOPs by tonometer-pachymeter and 1 each by GAT, DCT, and NCT) and compared preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. Of the 6 IOP values measured by the tonometer-pachymeter, 1 showed uncorrected IOP and 5 indicated central corneal thickness (CCT)-corrected IOPs through different formulas. Results: Preoperatively and postoperatively, the means of 9 IOP values measured by 4 tonometers were statistically different. The IOP measurements by the tonometer-pachymeter correlated with all other IOP values preoperatively; however, there was no correlation with IOP measurements using DCT postoperatively. Some IOPs using the tonometer-pachymeter were interchangeable with those using GAT preoperatively, but not with DCT preoperatively or postoperatively. The corrected IOP values of the tonometer-pachymeter formula 3 and DCT did not change after surgery. The percentage change in CCT and corneal curvature and change in diopters correlated with the percentage change in IOP measurements by GAT and NCT but not with those using DCT and the tonometer-pachymeter. Conclusion: Among the 9 IOP values, corrected IOP using the tonometer-pachymeter formula 3 showed similar IOP values after LASEK, as did DCT. Financial Disclosure: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.",
author = "Han, {Kyung Eun} and Hyesun Kim and Kim, {Na Rae} and Ikhyun Jun and Eungkweon Kim and Tae-im Kim",
year = "2013",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.01.035",
language = "English",
volume = "39",
pages = "888--897",
journal = "Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery",
issn = "0886-3350",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of intraocular pressures after myopic laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy

T2 - Tonometry-pachymetry, Goldmann applanation tonometry, dynamic contour tonometry, and noncontact tonometry

AU - Han, Kyung Eun

AU - Kim, Hyesun

AU - Kim, Na Rae

AU - Jun, Ikhyun

AU - Kim, Eungkweon

AU - Kim, Tae-im

PY - 2013/6/1

Y1 - 2013/6/1

N2 - Purpose: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements using a new tonometer-pachymeter device (Tonopachy), Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), and noncontact tonometry (NCT) before and after myopic laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK). Setting: Institute of Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. Design: Prospective comparative observational study. Methods: Nine IOP values were measured using 4 tonometers (6 IOPs by tonometer-pachymeter and 1 each by GAT, DCT, and NCT) and compared preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. Of the 6 IOP values measured by the tonometer-pachymeter, 1 showed uncorrected IOP and 5 indicated central corneal thickness (CCT)-corrected IOPs through different formulas. Results: Preoperatively and postoperatively, the means of 9 IOP values measured by 4 tonometers were statistically different. The IOP measurements by the tonometer-pachymeter correlated with all other IOP values preoperatively; however, there was no correlation with IOP measurements using DCT postoperatively. Some IOPs using the tonometer-pachymeter were interchangeable with those using GAT preoperatively, but not with DCT preoperatively or postoperatively. The corrected IOP values of the tonometer-pachymeter formula 3 and DCT did not change after surgery. The percentage change in CCT and corneal curvature and change in diopters correlated with the percentage change in IOP measurements by GAT and NCT but not with those using DCT and the tonometer-pachymeter. Conclusion: Among the 9 IOP values, corrected IOP using the tonometer-pachymeter formula 3 showed similar IOP values after LASEK, as did DCT. Financial Disclosure: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

AB - Purpose: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements using a new tonometer-pachymeter device (Tonopachy), Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), and noncontact tonometry (NCT) before and after myopic laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK). Setting: Institute of Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. Design: Prospective comparative observational study. Methods: Nine IOP values were measured using 4 tonometers (6 IOPs by tonometer-pachymeter and 1 each by GAT, DCT, and NCT) and compared preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. Of the 6 IOP values measured by the tonometer-pachymeter, 1 showed uncorrected IOP and 5 indicated central corneal thickness (CCT)-corrected IOPs through different formulas. Results: Preoperatively and postoperatively, the means of 9 IOP values measured by 4 tonometers were statistically different. The IOP measurements by the tonometer-pachymeter correlated with all other IOP values preoperatively; however, there was no correlation with IOP measurements using DCT postoperatively. Some IOPs using the tonometer-pachymeter were interchangeable with those using GAT preoperatively, but not with DCT preoperatively or postoperatively. The corrected IOP values of the tonometer-pachymeter formula 3 and DCT did not change after surgery. The percentage change in CCT and corneal curvature and change in diopters correlated with the percentage change in IOP measurements by GAT and NCT but not with those using DCT and the tonometer-pachymeter. Conclusion: Among the 9 IOP values, corrected IOP using the tonometer-pachymeter formula 3 showed similar IOP values after LASEK, as did DCT. Financial Disclosure: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84878000327&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84878000327&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.01.035

DO - 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.01.035

M3 - Article

C2 - 23688875

AN - SCOPUS:84878000327

VL - 39

SP - 888

EP - 897

JO - Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery

JF - Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery

SN - 0886-3350

IS - 6

ER -