Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Accuracy of dynamic contour tonometry compared with applanation tonometry in human cadaver eyes of different hydration states

  • Laboratory Investigation
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In an experimental laboratory investigation we compared intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained by dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), and pneumatonometry (PTG) with intracameral manometry on human cadaver corneas of different hydration conditions.

Methods

Ten freshly enucleated eyes were de-epithelialized. Two tubes were placed in the anterior chamber in opposite directions and connected to a transducer and to a bottle system filled with balanced salt solution. The pressure in the eye was then adjusted between 5 mmHg and 58 mmHg by electronically altering the height of the bottle. Central corneal thickness (CCT) was registered and IOP measurements were obtained with DCT, GAT, and PTG at each manometric pressure reading. Immediately after the trial the same corneas were artificially dehydrated and the same measurement regimen was repeated.

Results

In the pressure range defined by the bottle height 10–50 cm, IOP values measured by DCT were 0.50 mmHg (95% CI=0.40–0.60) and 0.36 mmHg (95% CI=0.25–0.47) higher than manometric readings before and after dehydration, respectively. GAT showed consistently lower values than manometry, the difference being −3.48 mmHg (95% CI=−3.91 to −3.05) and −3.14 mmHg (95% CI=−3.39 to −2.89), respectively. Similar results were obtained with PGT, namely differences of −4.75 mmHg (95% CI=−5.21 to −4.29) and −3.98 mmHg (95% CI=−4.48 to −3.48) for the hydrated and the dehydrated corneal condition, respectively. Only DCT showed no significant change in accuracy between hydrated and dehydrated corneas.

Conclusions

In this in vitro study DCT values for IOP were significantly closer to the manometric reference pressure than those obtained using GAT and PTG, independent of the state of corneal hydration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brandt JD, Beiser JA, Kass MA, Gordon MO (2001) Central corneal thickness in the ocular hypertension treatment study (OHTS). Ophthalmology 108:1779–1788

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bron AM, Creuzot-Garcher C, Goudeau-Boutillon S, d’Athis P (1999) Falsely elevated intraocular pressure due to increased central corneal thickness. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 237:220–224

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Doughty MJ, Zaman ML (2000) Human corneal thickness and its impact on intraocular pressure measures: a review and meta-analysis approach. Surv Ophthalmol 44:367–408

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Duch S, Serra A, Castanera J et al (2001) Tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis treatment. J Glaucoma 10:261–265

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Duffey RJ, Tchah H, Lindstrom RL (1989) Human cadaver corneal thinning for experimental refractive surgery. Refract Corneal Surg 5:41–42

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ehlers N, Bramsen T, Sperling S (1975) Applanation tonometry and central corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 53:34–43

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Eisenberg DL, Sherman BG, McKeown CA, Schuman JS (1998) Tonometry in adults and children. A manometric evaluation of pneumatonometry, applanation, and TonoPen in vitro and in vivo. Ophthalmology 105:1173–1181

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Feltgen N, Leifert D, Funk J (2001) Correlation between central corneal thickness, applanation tonometry, and direct intracameral IOP readings. Br J Ophthalmol 85:85–87

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Goldmann H (1955) Un nouveau tonometre d’applanation. Bull Soc Ophtalmol Fr 67:474–478

    Google Scholar 

  10. Goldmann H, Schmidt T (1957) Ueber Applanationstonometrie. Ophthalmologica 134:221–242

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Goldmann H, Schmidt T (1965) On applanation tonography. Ophthalmologica 150:65–75

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Goldmann H, Schmidt T (1966) Studien mittels Applanationstonographie. Doc Ophthalmol 20:184–213

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hamaoui M, Tahi H, Chapon P et al (2001) Corneal preparation of eye bank eyes for experimental surgery. Cornea 20:317–320

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Johnson M, Kass MA, Moses RA, Grodzki WJ (1978) Increased corneal thickness simulating elevated intraocular pressure. Arch Ophthalmol 96:664–665

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kaufmann C, Bachmann LM, Thiel MA (2003) Intraocular pressure measurements using dynamic contour tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44:3790–3794

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kniestedt C, Nee M, Stamper RL (2004) Dynamic contour tonometry. A comparative study on human cadaver eyes. Arch Ophthalmol 122:1287–1293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Langham ME, McCarthy E (1968) A rapid pneumatic applanation tonometer. Comparative findings and evaluation. Arch Ophthalmol 79:389–399

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Maloney RK (1990) Effect of corneal hydration and intraocular pressure on keratometric power after experimental radial keratotomy. Ophthalmology 97:927–933

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. McMillan F, Forster PK (1975) Comparison of MacKay-Marg, Goldmann and Perkins tonometers in abnormal corneas. Arch Ophthalmol 93:420–424

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Moses R (1958) The Goldmann applanation tonometer. Am J Ophthalmol 46:865–869

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Moses RA, Grodzki WJ (1979) The pneumatonograph. A laboratory study. Arch Ophthalmol 97:547–552

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Muller LJ, Pels E, Vrensen GF (2001) The specific architecture of the anterior stroma accounts for maintenance of corneal curvature. Br J Ophthalmol 85:437–443

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Shah S, Chatterjee A, Mathai M et al (1999) Relationship between corneal thickness and measured intraocular pressure in a general ophthalmology clinic. Ophthalmology 106:2154–2160

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Simon G, Small RH, Ren Q, Parel JM (1993) Effect of corneal hydration on Goldmann applanation tonometry and corneal topography. Refract Corneal Surg 9:110–117

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Singh RP, Goldberg I, Graham SL et al (2001) Central corneal thickness, tonometry, and ocular dimensions in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. J Glaucoma 10:206–210

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Swinger CA, Kornmehl EW (1985) Dehydration of post-mortem eyes for practice and experimental surgery. Ophthalmic Surg 16:182–183

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Terry MA, Ousley PJ, Zjhra ML (1994) Hydration changes in cadaver eyes prepared for practice and experimental surgery. Arch Ophthalmol 112:538–543

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Whitacre MM, Stein RA, Hassanein K (1993) The effect of corneal thickness on applanation tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol 115:592–596

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Wolfs RC, Klaver CC, Vingerling JR et al (1997) Distribution of central corneal thickness and its association with intraocular pressure: the Rotterdam Study. Am J Ophthalmol 123:767–772

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Christoph Kniestedt was financially supported by the Swiss National Fund, Berne, Switzerland and the Fund to Prevent and Fight Against Blindness, Zurich, Switzerland. The study itself was also supported by That Man May See Foundation, San Francisco, USA. The authors thank Swiss Microtechnology AG for the experimental dynamic contour tonometer and Alan Bostrom, PhD, from the Department of Biostatistics at UCSF for the statistical analysis. They also thank Robin Troyer for her support in the laboratory and for her coordination with the eye bank centers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA

    Christoph Kniestedt, Michelle Nee & Robert L. Stamper

  2. Department of Ophthalmology, University Eye Clinic, Frauenklinikstrasse 24, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland

    Christoph Kniestedt

Authors
  1. Christoph Kniestedt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michelle Nee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert L. Stamper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christoph Kniestedt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kniestedt, C., Nee, M. & Stamper, R.L. Accuracy of dynamic contour tonometry compared with applanation tonometry in human cadaver eyes of different hydration states. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 243, 359–366 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-004-1024-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-004-1024-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation