Unterschiede in den Messergebnissen nach Goldmann-Applanationstonometrie mit und ohne Fluoreszein

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Dr. N. Arend (1)
  C. Hirneiss (1)
  M. Kernt (1)
  
• 关键词：Augendruck ; Glaukom ; Augendruckmessung ; Hornhaut?dem ; Spaltlampe ; Intraocular pressure ; Corneal edema ; Glaucoma ; Intraocular pressure measurement ; Split lamp
• 刊名：Der Ophthalmologe
• 出版年：2014
• 出版时间：March 2014
• 年：2014
• 卷：111
• 期：3
• 页码：241-246
• 全文大小：587 KB
• 参考文献：1. Bhartiya S et al (2011) Comparative evaluation of TonoPen AVIA, Goldmann applanation tonometry and non-contact tonometry. Int Ophthalmol 31(4):297-02 CrossRef
  2. Cook JA et al (2012) Systematic review of the agreement of tonometers with Goldmann applanation tonometry. Ophthalmology 119(8):1552-557 CrossRef
  3. ElMallah MK, Asrani SG (2008) New ways to measure intraocular pressure. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 19(2):122-26 CrossRef
  4. Lamparter J, Hoffmann EM (2009) Measuring intraocular pressure by different methods. Ophthalmologe 106(8):676-82 CrossRef
  5. Vincent SJ et al (2011) Comparison of intraocular pressure measurement between rebound, non-contact and Goldmann applanation tonometry in treated glaucoma patients. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 40(4):e163–e170 CrossRef
  6. Rufer F (2011) Sources of error in Goldmann applanation tonometry. Ophthalmologe 108(6):546-52 CrossRef
  7. Goldmann HST (1957) über Applanationstonometrie. Ophthalmologica 134:221 CrossRef
  8. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476):307-10 CrossRef
  9. Bohm AG (2005) The risk of glaucoma and corneal thickness. Ophthalmologe 102(9):909-16 (quiz 917) CrossRef
  10. Muller L, Kohnen T (2009) Influence of residual corneal bed thickness after myopic LASIK on intraocular pressure measurements. Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry. Ophthalmologe 106(1):21-8 CrossRef
  11. Eicken J von, Kohlhaas M, Hoh H (2005) Glaucoma diagnostics and corneal thickness. Ophthalmologe 102(9):840-48 CrossRef
  12. Kohlhaas M et al (2006) Effect of central corneal thickness, corneal curvature, and axial length on applanation tonometry. Arch Ophthalmol 124(4):471-76 CrossRef
  13. Feltgen N, Leifert D, Funk J (2001) Correlation between central corneal thickness, applanation tonometry, and direct intracameral IOP readings. Br J Ophthalmol 85(1):85-7 CrossRef
  14. Stodtmeister R (1998) Applanation tonometry and correction according to corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 76(3):319-24 CrossRef
  15. Liu J, Roberts CJ (2005) Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurement: quantitative analysis. J Cataract Refract Surg 31(1):146-55 CrossRef
  16. Bright DC et al (1981) Goldmann applanation tonometry without fluorescein. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 58(12):1120-126
  
• 作者单位：Dr. N. Arend (1)
  C. Hirneiss (1)
  M. Kernt (1)
  
  1. Augenklinik, Klinikum der Universit?t München, Campus Innenstadt, Mathildenstr. 8, 80336, München, Deutschland
  
• ISSN：1433-0423

文摘

Background Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) is still the gold standard for measuring the intraocular pressure (IOP). Usually fluorescein eye drops are used additional to topical anesthesia to gain the best visualization results. The present study evaluated the differences in the results of GAT with and without fluorescein. Methods A total of 400 eyes of 200 patients without known glaucoma were enrolled in this study and randomized to two groups: group A (first measurement without, second measurement with fluorescein) and group B (first measurement with fluorescein, second without). All measurements were performed by the same examiner with the same slit lamp. Results were analyzed by Bland-Altman plots and Spearman’s correlation test. Results The examined groups showed no significant differences regarding patient age, astigmatism or reason for consulting. In both groups performing GAT without the application of fluorescein led to significantly lower measurement results. The differences were 1.5?±-.7?mmHg SD in group A, 1.2?±-.6?mmHg SD in group B and 1.4?±-.65?mmHg SD for all eyes. The intraocular pressure (IOP) and the differences between the groups were independent of patient age, astigmatism, reason of consulting or IOP level. Both groups showed outliers up to 10?mmHg difference because of corneal edema. Conclusions Measurements from GAT without fluorescein differed significantly from measurements with fluorescein, independently of patient age, astigmatism, reason for consulting or IOP level. The mean difference of 1.4?mmHg may seem negligible in daily routine but can lead to serious consequences in borderline cases.