Effect of Central Corneal Thickness on Dynamic Contour Tonometry and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry in Primary Open-angle Glaucoma | Glaucoma | JAMA Ophthalmology | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Whitacre  MMStein  R Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers.  Surv Ophthalmol 1993;381- 30PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Herndon  LWChoudhri  SACox  TDamji  KFShields  MBAllingham  RR Central corneal thickness in normal, glaucomatous, and ocular hypertensive eyes.  Arch Ophthalmol 1997;1151137- 1141PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Goldmann  HSchmidt  T Applanation tonometry [in German].  Ophthalmologica 1957;134221- 242PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Argus  WA Ocular hypertension and central corneal thickness.  Ophthalmology 1995;1021810- 1812PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Bron  AMCreuzot-Garcher  CGoudeau-Boutillon  Sd’Athis  P Falsely elevated intraocular pressure due to increased central corneal thickness.  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1999;237220- 224PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Copt  RPThomas  RMermoud  A Corneal thickness in ocular hypertension, primary open-angle glaucoma, and normal tension glaucoma.  Arch Ophthalmol 1999;11714- 16PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Herman  DCHodge  DOBourne  WM Increased corneal thickness in patients with ocular hypertension.  Arch Ophthalmol 2001;119334- 336PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Shah  SChatterjee  AMathai  M  et al.  Relationship between corneal thickness and measured intraocular pressure in a general ophthalmology clinic.  Ophthalmology 1999;1062154- 2160PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Ehlers  NHansen  FK Central corneal thickness in low-tension glaucoma.  Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1974;52740- 746PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Stodtmeister  R Applanation tonometry and correction according to corneal thickness.  Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1998;76319- 324PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Gordon  MOBeiser  JABrandt  JD  et al.  The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma.  Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120714- 730PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Medeiros  FASample  PAZangwill  LMBowd  CAihara  MWeinreb  RN Corneal thickness as a risk factor for visual field loss in patients with preperimetric glaucomatous optic neuropathy.  Am J Ophthalmol 2003;136805- 813PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Herndon  LWWeizer  JSStinnett  SS Central corneal thickness as a risk factor for advanced glaucoma damage.  Arch Ophthalmol 2004;12217- 21PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Chauhan  BCHutchison  DMLeBlanc  RPArtes  PHNicolela  MT Central corneal thickness and progression of the visual field and optic disc in glaucoma.  Br J Ophthalmol 2005;891008- 1012PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Damji  KFMuni  RHMunger  RM Influence of corneal variables on accuracy of intraocular pressure measurement.  J Glaucoma 2003;1269- 80PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Shah  S Accurate intraocular pressure measurement: the myth of modern ophthalmology?  Ophthalmology 2000;1071805- 1807PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Lee  GAKhaw  PTFicker  LAShah  P The corneal thickness and intraocular pressure story: where are we now?  Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2002;30334- 337PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
 Manufacturer's Manual. Version 7.4.  Port, Switzerland SMT Swiss Microtechnology AG 2004;
Kniestedt  CNee  MStamper  RL Dynamic contour tonometry: a comparative study on human cadaver eyes.  Arch Ophthalmol 2004;1221287- 1293PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Kniestedt  CNee  MStamper  RL Accuracy of dynamic contour tonometry compared with applanation tonometry in human cadaver eyes of different hydration states.  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2005;243359- 366PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Kanngiesser  HEKniestedt  CRobert  YC Dynamic contour tonometry: presentation of a new tonometer.  J Glaucoma 2005;14344- 350PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Kniestedt  CLin  SChoe  JBostrom  ANee  MStamper  RL Clinical comparison of contour and applanation tonometry and their relationship to pachymetry.  Arch Ophthalmol 2005;1231532- 1537PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Kotecha  AWhite  ETShewry  JMGarway-Heath  DF The relative effects of corneal thickness and age on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry.  Br J Ophthalmol 2005;891572- 1575PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Pache  MWilmsmeyer  SLautebach  SFunk  J Dynamic contour tonometry versus Goldmann applanation tonometry: a comparative study.  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2005;243763- 767PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Kaufmann  CBachmann  LMThiel  MA Intraocular pressure measurements using dynamic contour tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis.  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;443790- 3794PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Siganos  DSPapastergiou  GIMoedas  C Assessment of the Pascal dynamic contour tonometer in monitoring intraocular pressure in unoperated eyes and eyes after LASIK.  J Cataract Refract Surg 2004;30746- 751PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Bland  JMAltman  DG Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.  Lancet 1986;1307- 310PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Duba  IWirthlin  AC Dynamic contour tonometry for post-LASIK intraocular pressure measurements.  Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 2004;221347- 350PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Kamppeter  BAJonas  JB Dynamic contour tonometry for intraocular pressure measurement.  Am J Ophthalmol 2005;140318- 320PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Ito  TOhguro  HMamiya  KOhguro  INakazawa  M Effects of antiglaucoma drops on MMP and TIMP balance in conjunctival and subconjunctival tissue.  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47823- 830PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Feltgen  NLeifert  DFunk  J Correlation between central corneal thickness, applanation tonometry, and direct intracameral IOP readings.  Br J Ophthalmol 2001;8585- 87PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Marx  WMadjlessi  FReinhard  TAlthaus  CSundmacher  R More than 4 years' experience with electronic intraocular needle tonometry [in German].  Ophthalmologe 1999;96498- 502PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Ku  JYDanesh-Meyer  HVCraig  JPGamble  GDMcGhee  CN Comparison of intraocular pressure measured by Pascal dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry.  Eye 2006;20191- 198PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Korey  MGieser  DKass  MAWaltman  SRGordon  MBecker  B Central corneal endothelial cell density and central corneal thickness in ocular hypertension and primary open-angle glaucoma.  Am J Ophthalmol 1982;94610- 616PubMedGoogle Scholar
Wang  JJMitchell  PSimpson  JMCumming  RGSmith  W Visual impairment, age-related cataract, and mortality.  Arch Ophthalmol 2001;1191186- 1190PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Sherwood  MBGrierson  IMillar  LHitchings  RA Long-term morphologic effects of antiglaucoma drugs on the conjunctiva and Tenon's capsule in glaucomatous patients.  Ophthalmology 1989;96327- 335PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Baudouin  CPisella  PJFillacier  K  et al.  Ocular surface inflammatory changes induced by topical antiglaucoma drugs: human and animal studies.  Ophthalmology 1999;106556- 563PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Liu  JRoberts  CJ Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurement: quantitative analysis.  J Cataract Refract Surg 2005;31146- 155PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Malik  NSMoss  SJAhmed  NFurth  AJWall  RSMeek  KM Ageing of the human corneal stroma: structural and biochemical changes.  Biochim Biophys Acta 1992;1138222- 228PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Sherrard  ESNovakovic  PSpeedwell  L Age-related changes of the corneal endothelium and stroma as seen in vivo by specular microscopy.  Eye 1987;1197- 203PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Kaufmann  CBachmann  LMThiel  MA Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry.  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004;453118- 3121PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Clinical Sciences
June 2007

Effect of Central Corneal Thickness on Dynamic Contour Tonometry and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry in Primary Open-angle Glaucoma

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.

Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125(6):740-744. doi:10.1001/archopht.125.6.740

Objective  To compare the dependence of dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) on central corneal thickness (CCT) in primary open-angle glaucoma.

Methods  In a prospective study, the interocular (right vs left eye) difference in intraocular pressure measured by DCT and GAT was compared with the interocular CCT difference in 125 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma.

Results  Dynamic contour tonometry measurements (mean ± SD, 19.4 ± 4.1 mm Hg) were significantly (P = .004) higher than GAT measurements (mean ± SD, 15.5 ± 3.4 mm Hg), correlating significantly with each other (r2 = 0.82, P<.001). The interocular difference in intraocular pressure correlated significantly with the interocular CCT difference for GAT (r = 0.30, P = .001) and DCT (r = 0.23, P = .02) readings. Dynamic contour tonometry and GAT intraocular pressure differences significantly increased with older age (slope, 0.033 [95% confidence interval, 0.002-0.064] mm Hg/y; P =.03) but not with thicker CCT (slope, 0.006 [95% confidence interval, −0.003 to 0.017] mm Hg/μm; P =.22).

Conclusions  In this series, GAT and DCT measurements were dependent on CCT in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. Because intraocular pressure differences between DCT and GAT were independent of CCT, DCT and GAT are susceptible to similar measurement biases depending on CCT.