American Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume 145, Issue 5 , Pages 780-786.e1 , May 2008

Intraocular Pressure Measurements Following Descemet Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty

  • Thasarat S. Vajaranant

      Affiliations

    • Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
    • ,
  • Marianne O. Price

      Affiliations

    • Cornea Research Foundation of America, Indianapolis, Indiana
    • ,
  • Francis W. Price

      Affiliations

    • Price Vision Group, Indianapolis, Indiana
    • ,
  • Jacob T. Wilensky

      Affiliations

    • Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
    • ,
  • Deepak P. Edward

      Affiliations

    • Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
    • Department of Ophthalmology, Summa Health Systems, Akron, Ohio.
    • Corresponding Author InformationInquiries to Deepak P. Edward, Department of Ophthalmology, Summa Health System, 75 Arch Street, Suite #512, Akron, OH 44304

,Accepted 5 January 2008.

References 

  1. Price MO, Price FW. Descemet's stripping with endothelial keratoplasty: comparative outcomes with microkeratome-dissected and manually dissected donor tissue. Ophthalmology. 2006;13:1935–1342
  2. Price FW, Price MO. Descemet's stripping with endothelial keratoplasty in 200 eyes: Early challenges and techniques to enhance donor adherence. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006;32:411–418
  3. Price FW, Price MO. Descemet's stripping with endothelial keratoplasty in 50 eyes: a refractive neutral corneal transplant. J Refract Surg. 2005;21:339–345
  4. Whiteacre MM, Stein R. Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers. Surv Ophthalmol. 1993;38:1–30
  5. Kaufmann C, Bachmann LM, Thiel MA. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45:3118–3121
  6. Schneider E, Grehn F. Intraocular pressure measurement—comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry. J Glaucoma. 2006;15:2–6
  7. Kotecha A, White ET, Shewry JM, Garway-Heath DF. The relative effects of corneal thickness and age on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89:1572–1575
  8. Ku JY, Danesh-Meyer HV, Craig JP, Gamble GD, McGhee CN. Comparison of intraocular pressure measured by Pascal dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry. Eye. 2006;20:191–198
  9. Kaufmann C, Bachmann LM, Thiel MA. Intraocular pressure measurements using dynamic contour tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:3790–3794
  10. Siganos DS, Papastergiou GI, Moedas C. Assessment of the PASCAL dynamic contour tonometer in monitoring intraocular pressure in unoperated eyes and eyes after LASIK. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004;30:746–751
  11. Zadok D, Tran D, Twa M, et al. Pneumotonometric versus Goldmann tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1999;25:1344–1348
  12. Abbasoglu OE, Bowman RW, Cavanagh D, McCulley JP. Reliability of intraocular pressure measurements after myopic excimer refractive photokeratectomy. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:2193–2196
  13. Punjabi OS, Kniestedt C, Stamper RL, Lin SC. Dynamic contour tonometry: principal and use. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2006;34:837–840
  14. Herndon LW. Measuring intraocular pressure—adjustments for corneal thickness and new technologies. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2006;17:115–119
  15. Herdener S, Pache M, Lautebach S, Funk J. Dynamic contour tonometry versus Goldmann applanation tonometry—a comparison of agreement and reproducibility. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2007;245:1027–1030
  16. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307–310
  17. Doyle A, Lachkar Y. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry over a wider range of central corneal thickness. J Glaucoma. 2005;14:288–292
  18. Francis BA, Hsieh A, Lai M, et al. Effects of corneal thickness, corneal curvature, and intraocular pressure level on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:20–26
  19. Martinez JM, Garcia-Feijoo J, Vico E, et al. Effect of corneal thickness on dynamic contour, rebound, and Goldmann tonometry. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:2156–2162
  20. Barleon L, Hoffman EM, Berres M, et al. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation in glaucoma patients and healthy subjects. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;142:583–590
  21. Kniestedt C, Lin S, Choe J, et al. Clinical comparison of contour and applanation tonometry and their relationship to pachymetry. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123:1532–1537
  22. Medeiros FA, Sample PA, Weinreb RN. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry in African-American subjects. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:658–665
  23. Salvetat ML, Zeppieri M, Tosoni C, Brusini P. Comparisons between PASCAL dynamic tonometry, the tonopen, and Goldmann applanation tonometry in patients with glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2007;85:272–279
  24. Kniestedt C, Nee M, Stamper RL. Dynamic contour tonometry; a comparative study on human cadaver eyes. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004;122:1287–1292
  25. Kniestedt C, Nee M, Stamper RL. Accuracy of dynamic contour tonometry compared with applanation tonometry in human cadaver eyes of different hydration. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2005;243:359–366
  26. Price FW, Koller DL, Price MO. Central corneal pachymetry in patients undergoing laser in situ keratomileusis. Ophthalmology. 2000;107:1967–1968
  27. Allan BD, Terry MA, Price FW, Price MO, Griffin NB, Claesson M. Corneal transplant rejection rate and severity after endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea. 2007;26:1039–1042
  28. Pepose JS, Feigenbaum SK, Qazi MA, et al. Changes in corneal biomechanics and intraocular pressure following LASIK using static, dynamic and noncontact tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;143:39–47
  29. Broman AT, Congdon NG, Bandeen-Roche K, Quigley HA. Influence of corneal structure, corneal responsiveness, and other ocular parameters on tonometric measurement of intraocular pressure. J Glaucoma. 2007;16:581–588
  30. Chui W, Lam A, Chen D, Chui R. The influence of corneal properties on rebound tonometry. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:80–84

PII: S0002-9394(08)00040-8

doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2008.01.010

American Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume 145, Issue 5 , Pages 780-786.e1 , May 2008

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution