Cargando…

Tonometry by Ocular Response Analyzer in Keratoconic and Warpage Eyes in Comparison with Normal Eyes

PURPOSE: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) values measured by ocular response analyzer (ORA) in contact lens-induced corneal warpage, normal, and keratoconic eyes. METHODS: In a prospective, observational case–control study, 94 eyes of 47 warpage-suspected cases and 46 eyes of 23 keratoconic pat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alipour, Fateme, Hassanpoor, Narges, Letafatnejad, Moggan, Beheshtnejad, Amir-Hooshang, Mohammadi, Seyed-Farzad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8365575/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34409220
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JOCO.JOCO_147_20
_version_ 1783738736144547840
author Alipour, Fateme
Hassanpoor, Narges
Letafatnejad, Moggan
Beheshtnejad, Amir-Hooshang
Mohammadi, Seyed-Farzad
author_facet Alipour, Fateme
Hassanpoor, Narges
Letafatnejad, Moggan
Beheshtnejad, Amir-Hooshang
Mohammadi, Seyed-Farzad
author_sort Alipour, Fateme
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) values measured by ocular response analyzer (ORA) in contact lens-induced corneal warpage, normal, and keratoconic eyes. METHODS: In a prospective, observational case–control study, 94 eyes of 47 warpage-suspected cases and 46 eyes of 23 keratoconic patients were enrolled. Warpage-suspected cases were followed until a definite diagnosis was made (warpage, nonwarpage normal, or keratoconus). ORA tonometry and corneal biomechanics testing were performed for all cases in each visit. We had 2–3 measured corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc) and Goldmann-correlated IOP (IOPg) for each patient (based on group) with at least 2-week interval. RESULTS: After following up of warpage-suspected patients, finally 44 eyes of 22 patients had confirmed soft contact lens-related corneal warpage. Forty-six eyes of 23 people were finally diagnosed as nonwarpage normal eyes. Forty-six eyes of 23 known keratoconus patients were also included for comparison. The demographic and refractive data were not different between the warpage and nonwarpage normal groups but were different in the keratoconus group. Both IOPcc and IOPg were statistically different with the highest value in the warpage group followed by normal and keratoconus groups; the same trend was observed in central corneal thickness (CCT). The mean of IOPg was 14.94 ± 2.65, 13.7 ± 2.33, and 10.86 ± 3 and IOPcc was 15.73 ± 2.4, 15.28 ± 2.43, and 14.08 ± 2.55 in the warpage, normal, and keratoconus groups, respectively. IOPg and IOPcc in the warpage group (based on baseline diagnosis) did not regress to become closer to IOP of normal eyes after discontinuation of contact lens in their follow-up visits (P value for IOPg and IOPcc trends in the warpage group was 0.07 and 0.09 controlling for CCT, respectively). Both IOPcc and IOPg were significantly lower in keratoconic eyes in comparison with normal eyes. After correction for the confounding effect of CCT, a lower IOPcc in keratoconus versus warpage remained significant (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Both IOPcc and IOPg were statistically different with the highest value in the warpage group followed by normal and keratoconus groups, just like their CCT. After correction for the confounding effect of CCT, there was no statistically significant difference between the three groups in their measured IOPcc and IOPg except for IOPcc in keratoconus versus warpage (P = 0.02).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8365575
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83655752021-08-17 Tonometry by Ocular Response Analyzer in Keratoconic and Warpage Eyes in Comparison with Normal Eyes Alipour, Fateme Hassanpoor, Narges Letafatnejad, Moggan Beheshtnejad, Amir-Hooshang Mohammadi, Seyed-Farzad J Curr Ophthalmol Original Article PURPOSE: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) values measured by ocular response analyzer (ORA) in contact lens-induced corneal warpage, normal, and keratoconic eyes. METHODS: In a prospective, observational case–control study, 94 eyes of 47 warpage-suspected cases and 46 eyes of 23 keratoconic patients were enrolled. Warpage-suspected cases were followed until a definite diagnosis was made (warpage, nonwarpage normal, or keratoconus). ORA tonometry and corneal biomechanics testing were performed for all cases in each visit. We had 2–3 measured corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc) and Goldmann-correlated IOP (IOPg) for each patient (based on group) with at least 2-week interval. RESULTS: After following up of warpage-suspected patients, finally 44 eyes of 22 patients had confirmed soft contact lens-related corneal warpage. Forty-six eyes of 23 people were finally diagnosed as nonwarpage normal eyes. Forty-six eyes of 23 known keratoconus patients were also included for comparison. The demographic and refractive data were not different between the warpage and nonwarpage normal groups but were different in the keratoconus group. Both IOPcc and IOPg were statistically different with the highest value in the warpage group followed by normal and keratoconus groups; the same trend was observed in central corneal thickness (CCT). The mean of IOPg was 14.94 ± 2.65, 13.7 ± 2.33, and 10.86 ± 3 and IOPcc was 15.73 ± 2.4, 15.28 ± 2.43, and 14.08 ± 2.55 in the warpage, normal, and keratoconus groups, respectively. IOPg and IOPcc in the warpage group (based on baseline diagnosis) did not regress to become closer to IOP of normal eyes after discontinuation of contact lens in their follow-up visits (P value for IOPg and IOPcc trends in the warpage group was 0.07 and 0.09 controlling for CCT, respectively). Both IOPcc and IOPg were significantly lower in keratoconic eyes in comparison with normal eyes. After correction for the confounding effect of CCT, a lower IOPcc in keratoconus versus warpage remained significant (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Both IOPcc and IOPg were statistically different with the highest value in the warpage group followed by normal and keratoconus groups, just like their CCT. After correction for the confounding effect of CCT, there was no statistically significant difference between the three groups in their measured IOPcc and IOPg except for IOPcc in keratoconus versus warpage (P = 0.02). Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021-07-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8365575/ /pubmed/34409220 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JOCO.JOCO_147_20 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Journal of Current Ophthalmology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Alipour, Fateme
Hassanpoor, Narges
Letafatnejad, Moggan
Beheshtnejad, Amir-Hooshang
Mohammadi, Seyed-Farzad
Tonometry by Ocular Response Analyzer in Keratoconic and Warpage Eyes in Comparison with Normal Eyes
title Tonometry by Ocular Response Analyzer in Keratoconic and Warpage Eyes in Comparison with Normal Eyes
title_full Tonometry by Ocular Response Analyzer in Keratoconic and Warpage Eyes in Comparison with Normal Eyes
title_fullStr Tonometry by Ocular Response Analyzer in Keratoconic and Warpage Eyes in Comparison with Normal Eyes
title_full_unstemmed Tonometry by Ocular Response Analyzer in Keratoconic and Warpage Eyes in Comparison with Normal Eyes
title_short Tonometry by Ocular Response Analyzer in Keratoconic and Warpage Eyes in Comparison with Normal Eyes
title_sort tonometry by ocular response analyzer in keratoconic and warpage eyes in comparison with normal eyes
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8365575/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34409220
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JOCO.JOCO_147_20
work_keys_str_mv AT alipourfateme tonometrybyocularresponseanalyzerinkeratoconicandwarpageeyesincomparisonwithnormaleyes
AT hassanpoornarges tonometrybyocularresponseanalyzerinkeratoconicandwarpageeyesincomparisonwithnormaleyes
AT letafatnejadmoggan tonometrybyocularresponseanalyzerinkeratoconicandwarpageeyesincomparisonwithnormaleyes
AT beheshtnejadamirhooshang tonometrybyocularresponseanalyzerinkeratoconicandwarpageeyesincomparisonwithnormaleyes
AT mohammadiseyedfarzad tonometrybyocularresponseanalyzerinkeratoconicandwarpageeyesincomparisonwithnormaleyes