Cargando…
Intraocular Pressure Measurement after Penetrating Keratoplasty
Assessing the intraocular pressure is a difficult but crucial task in the follow-up of patients that have undergone penetrating keratoplasty. Early recognition of elevated intraocular pressure and/or glaucoma and establishment of the appropriate treatment is essential to ensure the best possible vis...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8870783/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35204325 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12020234 |
_version_ | 1784656840054800384 |
---|---|
author | Dumitrescu, Otilia-Maria Istrate, Sinziana Macovei, Mioara-Laura Gheorghe, Alina Gabriela |
author_facet | Dumitrescu, Otilia-Maria Istrate, Sinziana Macovei, Mioara-Laura Gheorghe, Alina Gabriela |
author_sort | Dumitrescu, Otilia-Maria |
collection | PubMed |
description | Assessing the intraocular pressure is a difficult but crucial task in the follow-up of patients that have undergone penetrating keratoplasty. Early recognition of elevated intraocular pressure and/or glaucoma and establishment of the appropriate treatment is essential to ensure the best possible visual outcome for patients dealing with this feared complication. Although Goldmann applanation tonometry is still the gold standard for measuring the intraocular pressure, its limitations in postkeratoplasty eyes, due to postoperative modified corneal morphology, have led to the search for more suitable alternatives. This review is the result of a comprehensive literature search in the MEDLINE database that aims to present glaucoma in the context of perforating keratoplasty, the corneal properties with impact on ocular pressure measurement, and the results achieved with the most important tonometers that have been studied in this pathology. Goldmann applanation tonometry remains the reference for intraocular pressure assessment even in corneas after penetrating keratoplasty. However, some promising alternatives have emerged, the most important of which are the Pascal dynamic contour tonometry, the Tono-Pen XL, the ocular response analyzer, and the iCare. All have advantages and disadvantages but have proved to be appropriate alternatives, especially in cases in which Goldmann applanation tonometry cannot be used. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8870783 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88707832022-02-25 Intraocular Pressure Measurement after Penetrating Keratoplasty Dumitrescu, Otilia-Maria Istrate, Sinziana Macovei, Mioara-Laura Gheorghe, Alina Gabriela Diagnostics (Basel) Review Assessing the intraocular pressure is a difficult but crucial task in the follow-up of patients that have undergone penetrating keratoplasty. Early recognition of elevated intraocular pressure and/or glaucoma and establishment of the appropriate treatment is essential to ensure the best possible visual outcome for patients dealing with this feared complication. Although Goldmann applanation tonometry is still the gold standard for measuring the intraocular pressure, its limitations in postkeratoplasty eyes, due to postoperative modified corneal morphology, have led to the search for more suitable alternatives. This review is the result of a comprehensive literature search in the MEDLINE database that aims to present glaucoma in the context of perforating keratoplasty, the corneal properties with impact on ocular pressure measurement, and the results achieved with the most important tonometers that have been studied in this pathology. Goldmann applanation tonometry remains the reference for intraocular pressure assessment even in corneas after penetrating keratoplasty. However, some promising alternatives have emerged, the most important of which are the Pascal dynamic contour tonometry, the Tono-Pen XL, the ocular response analyzer, and the iCare. All have advantages and disadvantages but have proved to be appropriate alternatives, especially in cases in which Goldmann applanation tonometry cannot be used. MDPI 2022-01-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8870783/ /pubmed/35204325 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12020234 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review Dumitrescu, Otilia-Maria Istrate, Sinziana Macovei, Mioara-Laura Gheorghe, Alina Gabriela Intraocular Pressure Measurement after Penetrating Keratoplasty |
title | Intraocular Pressure Measurement after Penetrating Keratoplasty |
title_full | Intraocular Pressure Measurement after Penetrating Keratoplasty |
title_fullStr | Intraocular Pressure Measurement after Penetrating Keratoplasty |
title_full_unstemmed | Intraocular Pressure Measurement after Penetrating Keratoplasty |
title_short | Intraocular Pressure Measurement after Penetrating Keratoplasty |
title_sort | intraocular pressure measurement after penetrating keratoplasty |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8870783/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35204325 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12020234 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dumitrescuotiliamaria intraocularpressuremeasurementafterpenetratingkeratoplasty AT istratesinziana intraocularpressuremeasurementafterpenetratingkeratoplasty AT macoveimioaralaura intraocularpressuremeasurementafterpenetratingkeratoplasty AT gheorghealinagabriela intraocularpressuremeasurementafterpenetratingkeratoplasty |