Cargando…
Differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry and Dynamic Contour Tonometry following Trabeculectomy
Background. To evaluate differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry (GAT) and Dynamic Controur Tonometry (DCT) following trabeculectomy. Methods. Thirty eight glaucomatous eyes with a history of trabeculectomy (Trabeculectomy group, TG), 20 eyes without a history of trabeculectomy but with a...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2913849/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20706652 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2010/357387 |
_version_ | 1782184699285733376 |
---|---|
author | Detorakis, Efstathios T. Grammenandi, Emilia Pallikaris, Ioannis G. Tsilimbaris, Miltiadis K. |
author_facet | Detorakis, Efstathios T. Grammenandi, Emilia Pallikaris, Ioannis G. Tsilimbaris, Miltiadis K. |
author_sort | Detorakis, Efstathios T. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background. To evaluate differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry (GAT) and Dynamic Controur Tonometry (DCT) following trabeculectomy. Methods. Thirty eight glaucomatous eyes with a history of trabeculectomy (Trabeculectomy group, TG), 20 eyes without a history of trabeculectomy but with a history of latanoprost use (Latanoprost group, LG), and 19 nonglaucomatous eyes (Control group, CG) were included. GAT-IOP, DCT-IOP, the difference between them (dIOP), the central corneal thickness (CCT), the axial length (AL), and the depth of the anterior chamber (ACD) were measured. Results. dIOP was significantly higher in TG (5.19 mmHg) than in LG (4.01 mmHg) and CG (1.98 mmHg). Correlations between AL and dIOP were statistically significant in both TG and LG but not in CG whereas correlations between dIOP and other clinical parameters examined were statistically not significant in all groups. Conclusions. The significantly higher dIOP in TG implies that the bio-mechanical properties of the ocular walls are altered following trabeculectomy. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2913849 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | Hindawi Publishing Corporation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-29138492010-08-12 Differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry and Dynamic Contour Tonometry following Trabeculectomy Detorakis, Efstathios T. Grammenandi, Emilia Pallikaris, Ioannis G. Tsilimbaris, Miltiadis K. J Ophthalmol Clinical Study Background. To evaluate differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry (GAT) and Dynamic Controur Tonometry (DCT) following trabeculectomy. Methods. Thirty eight glaucomatous eyes with a history of trabeculectomy (Trabeculectomy group, TG), 20 eyes without a history of trabeculectomy but with a history of latanoprost use (Latanoprost group, LG), and 19 nonglaucomatous eyes (Control group, CG) were included. GAT-IOP, DCT-IOP, the difference between them (dIOP), the central corneal thickness (CCT), the axial length (AL), and the depth of the anterior chamber (ACD) were measured. Results. dIOP was significantly higher in TG (5.19 mmHg) than in LG (4.01 mmHg) and CG (1.98 mmHg). Correlations between AL and dIOP were statistically significant in both TG and LG but not in CG whereas correlations between dIOP and other clinical parameters examined were statistically not significant in all groups. Conclusions. The significantly higher dIOP in TG implies that the bio-mechanical properties of the ocular walls are altered following trabeculectomy. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2010 2010-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC2913849/ /pubmed/20706652 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2010/357387 Text en Copyright © 2010 Efstathios T. Detorakis et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Study Detorakis, Efstathios T. Grammenandi, Emilia Pallikaris, Ioannis G. Tsilimbaris, Miltiadis K. Differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry and Dynamic Contour Tonometry following Trabeculectomy |
title | Differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry and Dynamic Contour Tonometry following Trabeculectomy |
title_full | Differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry and Dynamic Contour Tonometry following Trabeculectomy |
title_fullStr | Differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry and Dynamic Contour Tonometry following Trabeculectomy |
title_full_unstemmed | Differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry and Dynamic Contour Tonometry following Trabeculectomy |
title_short | Differences between Goldmann Applanation Tonometry and Dynamic Contour Tonometry following Trabeculectomy |
title_sort | differences between goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry following trabeculectomy |
topic | Clinical Study |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2913849/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20706652 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2010/357387 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT detorakisefstathiost differencesbetweengoldmannapplanationtonometryanddynamiccontourtonometryfollowingtrabeculectomy AT grammenandiemilia differencesbetweengoldmannapplanationtonometryanddynamiccontourtonometryfollowingtrabeculectomy AT pallikarisioannisg differencesbetweengoldmannapplanationtonometryanddynamiccontourtonometryfollowingtrabeculectomy AT tsilimbarismiltiadisk differencesbetweengoldmannapplanationtonometryanddynamiccontourtonometryfollowingtrabeculectomy |