Person: Martínez De La Casa Fernández-Borrella, José María
Loading...
First Name
José María
Last Name
Martínez De La Casa Fernández-Borrella
Affiliation
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Faculty / Institute
Óptica y Optometría
Department
Inmunología, Oftalmología y ORL
Area
Oftalmología
Identifiers
4 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Item Comparision of intraocular pressure measured using the new icare 200™ rebound tonometer and the Perkins™ applanation tonometer in healthy subjects and in patients with primary congenital glaucoma(Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmología (English Edition), 2021) Pérez García, Pilar; Morales Fernández, Laura; Sáenz Francés, Federico; Méndez Hernández, Carmen Dora; García Feijoo, Julián; Santos Bueso, Enrique; Martínez De La Casa Fernández-Borrella, José MaríaObjective: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained using the Icare 200™ (IC200) rebound tonometer and the hand-held version of the Goldmann Applanation Tonometer (Perkins™ tonometer, GAT) in patients with primary congenital glaucoma (PCG) and in healthy subjects. Material and methods: A total of 42 eyes of healthy subjects (G1) and 40 patients with PCG (G2) were analysed. The following clinical data were collected: gender, age, Cup/Disc ratio, central corneal thickness (CCT). IOP was determined in the examination room using the IC200 and GAT tonometers, in the same order. Agreement between both tonometers was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman plot. A linear regression analysis was used to establish the IOP was affected by the studied variables. Results: Mean IOP between both tonometers (IC200 minus GAT) was: G1 = 15.91 (2.57) mmHg vs. 15.06 (2.12) mmHg (mean difference, MD = 0.84 (0.50) mmHg; P < .101) and G2=20.10 (6.37) vs.19.12 (5.62) (MD = 0.98 (1.36); P = 0.474). Excellent agreement was found between IC200 and GAT in both groups (ICC = G1: 0.875 (95% CI; 0.768−0.933; P < .001); G2: 0.924 (95% CI; 0.852−0.961; P < .001), and there was a statistically significant correlation between the IOP difference measured with IC200 and GAT and CCT in G1 (B=0.021; 95% CI; 0.005–0.037; P = .008), but was not statistically significant in G2. Conclusions: There was excellent agreement between the IC200 and GAT tonometers, both in healthy subjects and PCG, with a trend to overestimate IOP when measured with IC200. There was no influence by CCT on IOP measurements in patients with PGC.Item Agreement between rebound (Icare ic200) and applanation tonometry (Perkins) in patients with primary congenital glaucoma(Acta Ophthalmologica, 2020) Morales Fernández, Laura; Pérez García, Pilar; Sáenz Francés, Federico; Molero Senosiain, Mercedes; García Sáenz, Sofía; Méndez Hernández, Carmen Dora; Santos Bueso, Enrique; García Feijoo, Julián; Martínez De La Casa Fernández-Borrella, José MaríaPurpose: To examine agreement between intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements made using the rebound tonometer Icare ic200 (RT200) and the Perkins handheld applanation tonometer (PAT) in patients with primary congenital glaucoma (PCG). The impacts of several covariables on measurements using the two devices were also assessed. Materials and Methods: Intraocular pressure measurements were made in a single session in 86 eyes of 86 patients with PCG (46 under anaesthesia, 40 in the office). The order was RT200 then PAT. The variables age, central corneal thickness (CCT), corneal state and anaesthesia were recorded in each patient. Data were compared by determining interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for each tonometer and representing the differences detected as Bland–Altman plots. Effects of covariables were assessed through univariate and multivariate regression. Results: Mean IOP difference between tonometers (RT200 minus PAT) was 1.26 mmHg (95%: 0.22–2.31). Absolute agreement (ICC) was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.62–0.82). Lower and upper limits of agreement (95%) were −8.06 mmHg (95% CI: −9.87 to −6.25) and 10.59 mmHg (95% CI: 8.77–12.40), respectively. The tonometers showed systematic differences (a = −4.63 mmHg; 95% CI: −9.11 to −1.44) and proportional differences; for each mmHg increase in PAT‐IOP, the RT200 reading increased by 1.28 mmHg (b = 1.28; 95% CI: 1.12–1.53). None of the variables tested as predictors were able to explain differences between the tonometers. Conclusions: Despite the good overall agreement between both tonometers, caution should be taken in high values of IOP, considering the interchangeability of its readings as systematic and proportional differences appear to exist between both methods.Item Dependence of dynamic contour and Goldmann applanation tonometries on peripheral corneal thickness(International journal of ophthalmology, 2017) Sáenz Francés, Federico; Sanz Pozo, Claudia; Borrego Sanz, Lara; Jañez Escalada, Luis; Morales Fernández, Laura; Martínez De La Casa Fernández-Borrella, José María; García Sánchez, Julián; García Feijoo, Julián; Santos Bueso, Enrique MiguelAIM: To determine the effects of peripheral corneal thickness (PCT) on dynamic contour tonometry(DCT) and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT). METHODS: A cross-sectional study. We created a software which calculates the corneal contour (CC) as a function of the radius from the corneal apex to each pixel of the contour. The software generates a central circumference with a radius of 1 mm and the remainder of the cornea is segmented in 5 rings concentric with corneal apex being its diameter not constant around the corneal circumference as a consequence of the irregular CC but keeping constant the diameter of each ring in each direction of the contour. PCT was determined as the mean thickness of the most eccentric ring. Locally weighted scatterplot smoothing (LOWESS) regression was used to determine the pattern of the relationship between PCT and both DCT and GAT respectively. Thereafter, two multivariable linear regression models were constructed. In each of them, the dependant variable was intraocular pressure (IOP) as determined using GAT and DCT respectively. In both of the models the predictive variable was PCT though LOWESS regression pattern was used to model the relationship between the dependant variables and the predictor one. Age and sex were also introduced control variables along with their first-degree interactions with PCT. Main outcome measures include amount of IOP variation explained through regression models (R2) and regression coefficients (B). RESULTS: Subjects included 109 eyes of 109 healthy individuals. LOWESS regression suggested that a 2nd-degree polynomial would be suitable to model the relationship between both DCT and GAT with PCT. Hence PCT was introduced in both models as a linear and quadratic term. Neither age nor sex nor interactions were statistically significant in both models. For GAT model, R2 was 17.14% (F=9.02; P=0.0002), PCT linear term B was -1.163 (95% CI: -1.163, -0.617). PCT quadratic term B was 0.00081 (95% CI: 0.00043, 0.00118). For DCT model R2 was 14.28% (F=9.29; P=0.0002), PCT linear term B was -0.712 (95% CI: -1.052, -0.372), PCT quadratic term was B=0.0005 (95% CI: 0.0003, 0.0007). CONCLUSION: DCT and GAT measurements are conditioned by PCT though this effect, rather than linear, follows a 2nd-degree polynomial pattern.Item Easyton ® transpalpebral versus Perkins applanation tonometry in different clinical populations(2023) Montolío Marzo, Elena; Morales Fernández, Laura; Sáenz Francés, Federico; García Sáenz, Sofía; García Feijoo, Julián; Piñero, David Pablo; Martínez De La Casa Fernández-Borrella, José MaríaObjective: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained using the new transpalpebral Easyton® tonometer and Perkins applanation tonometer (PAT) in three different clinical populations. Methods: The participants of this prospective study were 84 subjects divided into the groups: 22 healthy children (G1), 42 healthy adults (G2), and 20 adult patients with primary open angle glaucoma (G3). The data recorded in 84 eyes of these subjects were age, sex, eye, central corneal thickness (CCT) and axial length (AL). In all eyes, IOP was determined in the same examination room by the same experienced examiner using Easyton® and PAT in random order. Results: Mean differences in IOP readings between Easyton® and PAT were 0.45 ± 1.97 (p = 0.295), -0.15 ± 2.13 (p = 0.654), -1.65 ± 3.22 (p = 0.033), and − 0.018 ± 2.500 mmHg (p = 0.500) in the groups G1, G2, G3 and whole sample (G4), respectively. Correlations between Easyton® and PAT IOP values were 0.668 (p = 0.001) for G1, 0.463 (p = 0.002) for G2, 0.680 (p < 0.001) for G3 and 0.605 (p < 0.001) for G4. Moderate to good agreement between the two tonometers was found in all groups according to intraclass correlation coefficients, which were 0.794 (p < 0.001) for G1, 0.632 (p < 0.001) for G2, 0.809 (p < 0.001) for G3, and 0.740 (p < 0.001) for G4. The lower and upper limits of agreement between the devices were − 5.1 and 4.7 mmHg, respectively. No correlation was noted between CCT or AL and the Easyton® IOP measurements. Conclusion: IOP measurements obtained with Easyton® and PAT show an acceptable level of agreement both in healthy individuals and in patients with glaucoma.