Aviso: para depositar documentos, por favor, inicia sesión e identifícate con tu cuenta de correo institucional de la UCM con el botón MI CUENTA UCM. No emplees la opción AUTENTICACIÓN CON CONTRASEÑA
 

Measuring intraocular pressure after intrastromal corneal ring segment implantation with rebound tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry

dc.contributor.authorArribas Pardo, Paula
dc.contributor.authorMéndez Hernández, Carmen Dora
dc.contributor.authorCuiña Sardiña, Ricardo
dc.contributor.authorFernández Pérez, Cristina
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-18T05:43:04Z
dc.date.available2023-06-18T05:43:04Z
dc.date.issued2015-05
dc.descriptionReceived March 13, 2014 ; Received in revised form November 30, 2014 ; Accepted December 18, 2014
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The aim of this study was to compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements in patients with ectatic corneas after intrastromal corneal ring segment (ICRS) implantation using the Rebound tonometers (RBTs) Icare and Icare Pro, compared with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and to assess the influence of central corneal thickness (CCT), corneal curvature (CC), and corneal astigmatism (CA) on IOP. Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study consecutively included 60 eyes of 60 patients with corneal ectasia having ICRS for at least 6 months from January 2011 to December 2013. All subjects underwent GAT, Icare, and Icare Pro IOP measurements in a random order, and CCT, CC, and CA evaluation using a Pentacam. The Bland–Altman method and multivariate regression analysis logistic method were used to assess intertonometer agreement and the influence of corneal variables on IOP measurements. Results: Icare significantly underestimated IOP compared with GAT [GAT - Icare 1.2 ± 3.0 mm Hg, P = 0.002 (95% confidence interval, 0.5–2.0)], whereas Icare Pro showed no statistical differences compared with GAT [GAT - Icare Pro 0.1 ± 3.1 mm Hg, P = 0.853 (95% confidence interval, -0.7 to 0.9)]. Both RBTs presented good concordance with GAT (intraclass coefficient correlation > 0.6). All tonometer measurements were influenced by CCT values and age (P < 0.05); the number of ICRS implanted did not influenced IOP measurement with any of the 3 tonometers. Conclusions: Both RBTs could be an alternative to GAT in patients with corneal ectasia and ICRS; however, Icare Pro shows greater accuracy.
dc.description.departmentDepto. de Optometría y Visión
dc.description.facultyFac. de Óptica y Optometría
dc.description.refereedTRUE
dc.description.statuspub
dc.eprint.idhttps://eprints.ucm.es/id/eprint/41411
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/ICO.0000000000000374
dc.identifier.issn0277-3740
dc.identifier.officialurlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0000000000000374
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/23143
dc.issue.number5
dc.journal.titleCornea
dc.language.isoeng
dc.page.final520
dc.page.initial516
dc.publisherWolters Kluwer Health
dc.rights.accessRightsrestricted access
dc.subject.cdu617.713
dc.subject.cdu617.7-073.178
dc.subject.keywordKeratoconus
dc.subject.keywordIntrastromal corneal ring segments
dc.subject.keywordRebound tonometry
dc.subject.keywordIcare
dc.subject.keywordIcare Pro
dc.subject.ucmCirugía
dc.subject.ucmOftalmología
dc.subject.unesco3213 Cirugía
dc.subject.unesco3201.09 Oftalmología
dc.titleMeasuring intraocular pressure after intrastromal corneal ring segment implantation with rebound tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry
dc.typejournal article
dc.volume.number34
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication533dd90f-2b34-4a5f-9cf8-ab8d19454edd
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationa08d537d-093f-4d91-bd1a-f52ba4af4572
relation.isAuthorOfPublicatione3b551e4-0127-4a0e-ad9e-2232be67b78b
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoverya08d537d-093f-4d91-bd1a-f52ba4af4572

Download

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Mesuriing intraocular-Cornea-2015.pdf
Size:
193.63 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections