Cargando…

Dynamic contour tonometry in asymmetric glaucoma patients

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine any difference in dynamic contour tonometry and ocular pulse amplitude in asymmetric glaucoma patients with the same applanation intraocular pressure. METHODS: This is a prospective, observational study of 30 glaucoma patients and 11 controls fr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Suzuki, Emilio Rintaro, Suzuki, Cibele Lima Belico, Carlier, Danielle, Penha, Daniele, Parchen, Marta dos Anjos Rodrigues, Batista, Wagner Duarte, Netto, Joao Agostini
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3334221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22536052
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S17710
_version_ 1782230616355373056
author Suzuki, Emilio Rintaro
Suzuki, Cibele Lima Belico
Carlier, Danielle
Penha, Daniele
Parchen, Marta dos Anjos Rodrigues
Batista, Wagner Duarte
Netto, Joao Agostini
author_facet Suzuki, Emilio Rintaro
Suzuki, Cibele Lima Belico
Carlier, Danielle
Penha, Daniele
Parchen, Marta dos Anjos Rodrigues
Batista, Wagner Duarte
Netto, Joao Agostini
author_sort Suzuki, Emilio Rintaro
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine any difference in dynamic contour tonometry and ocular pulse amplitude in asymmetric glaucoma patients with the same applanation intraocular pressure. METHODS: This is a prospective, observational study of 30 glaucoma patients and 11 controls from June 2007 to February 2008. Most of the glaucoma patients were on prostaglandin analog treatment. RESULTS: Mean applanation intraocular pressure in the control group was 14.28 mmHg for the right eye and 14.10 mmHg for the left eye (P > 0.05). Corneal thickness was 519.10 μm for the right eye and 511.07 μm for the left eye (P > 0.05). Mean dynamic contour tonometry intraocular pressure was 17.28 mmHg for the right eye and 17.25 mmHg for the left eye (P > 0.05). Mean ocular pulse amplitude was 2.80 mmHg for the right eye and 2.92 mmHg for the left eye (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: No differences in ocular pulse amplitude were found between the two groups and between the worst and the best eye. In spite of there being no difference in ocular pulse amplitude, dynamic contour tonometry intraocular pressure was 2.44 mmHg higher in the worst eye than in the best eye in the glaucoma patients, even with the same applanation intraocular pressure. Further studies are needed to confirm if this difference is related to glaucoma progression or a worst prognosis and whether it can be considered to be a new risk factor.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3334221
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33342212012-04-25 Dynamic contour tonometry in asymmetric glaucoma patients Suzuki, Emilio Rintaro Suzuki, Cibele Lima Belico Carlier, Danielle Penha, Daniele Parchen, Marta dos Anjos Rodrigues Batista, Wagner Duarte Netto, Joao Agostini Clin Ophthalmol Review BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine any difference in dynamic contour tonometry and ocular pulse amplitude in asymmetric glaucoma patients with the same applanation intraocular pressure. METHODS: This is a prospective, observational study of 30 glaucoma patients and 11 controls from June 2007 to February 2008. Most of the glaucoma patients were on prostaglandin analog treatment. RESULTS: Mean applanation intraocular pressure in the control group was 14.28 mmHg for the right eye and 14.10 mmHg for the left eye (P > 0.05). Corneal thickness was 519.10 μm for the right eye and 511.07 μm for the left eye (P > 0.05). Mean dynamic contour tonometry intraocular pressure was 17.28 mmHg for the right eye and 17.25 mmHg for the left eye (P > 0.05). Mean ocular pulse amplitude was 2.80 mmHg for the right eye and 2.92 mmHg for the left eye (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: No differences in ocular pulse amplitude were found between the two groups and between the worst and the best eye. In spite of there being no difference in ocular pulse amplitude, dynamic contour tonometry intraocular pressure was 2.44 mmHg higher in the worst eye than in the best eye in the glaucoma patients, even with the same applanation intraocular pressure. Further studies are needed to confirm if this difference is related to glaucoma progression or a worst prognosis and whether it can be considered to be a new risk factor. Dove Medical Press 2012 2012-04-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3334221/ /pubmed/22536052 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S17710 Text en © 2012 Suzuki et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd. This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review
Suzuki, Emilio Rintaro
Suzuki, Cibele Lima Belico
Carlier, Danielle
Penha, Daniele
Parchen, Marta dos Anjos Rodrigues
Batista, Wagner Duarte
Netto, Joao Agostini
Dynamic contour tonometry in asymmetric glaucoma patients
title Dynamic contour tonometry in asymmetric glaucoma patients
title_full Dynamic contour tonometry in asymmetric glaucoma patients
title_fullStr Dynamic contour tonometry in asymmetric glaucoma patients
title_full_unstemmed Dynamic contour tonometry in asymmetric glaucoma patients
title_short Dynamic contour tonometry in asymmetric glaucoma patients
title_sort dynamic contour tonometry in asymmetric glaucoma patients
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3334221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22536052
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S17710
work_keys_str_mv AT suzukiemiliorintaro dynamiccontourtonometryinasymmetricglaucomapatients
AT suzukicibelelimabelico dynamiccontourtonometryinasymmetricglaucomapatients
AT carlierdanielle dynamiccontourtonometryinasymmetricglaucomapatients
AT penhadaniele dynamiccontourtonometryinasymmetricglaucomapatients
AT parchenmartadosanjosrodrigues dynamiccontourtonometryinasymmetricglaucomapatients
AT batistawagnerduarte dynamiccontourtonometryinasymmetricglaucomapatients
AT nettojoaoagostini dynamiccontourtonometryinasymmetricglaucomapatients