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 34.239.177.24. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Whitacre  MMStein  R Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers.  Surv Ophthalmol 1993;381- 30PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Herndon  LWChoudhri  SACox  TDamji  KFShields  MBAllingham  RR Central corneal thickness in normal, glaucomatous, and ocular hypertensive eyes.  Arch Ophthalmol 1997;1151137- 1141PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Goldmann  HSchmidt  T Applanation tonometry [in German].  Ophthalmologica 1957;134221- 242PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Argus  WA Ocular hypertension and central corneal thickness.  Ophthalmology 1995;1021810- 1812PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
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
6.
Copt  RPThomas  RMermoud  A Corneal thickness in ocular hypertension, primary open-angle glaucoma, and normal tension glaucoma.  Arch Ophthalmol 1999;11714- 16PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Herman  DCHodge  DOBourne  WM Increased corneal thickness in patients with ocular hypertension.  Arch Ophthalmol 2001;119334- 336PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Shah  SChatterjee  AMathai  M  et al.  Relationship between corneal thickness and measured intraocular pressure in a general ophthalmology clinic.  Ophthalmology 1999;1062154- 2160PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Ehlers  NHansen  FK Central corneal thickness in low-tension glaucoma.  Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1974;52740- 746PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Stodtmeister  R Applanation tonometry and correction according to corneal thickness.  Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1998;76319- 324PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
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
12.
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
13.
Herndon  LWWeizer  JSStinnett  SS Central corneal thickness as a risk factor for advanced glaucoma damage.  Arch Ophthalmol 2004;12217- 21PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
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
15.
Damji  KFMuni  RHMunger  RM Influence of corneal variables on accuracy of intraocular pressure measurement.  J Glaucoma 2003;1269- 80PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Shah  S Accurate intraocular pressure measurement: the myth of modern ophthalmology?  Ophthalmology 2000;1071805- 1807PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Lee  GAKhaw  PTFicker  LAShah  P The corneal thickness and intraocular pressure story: where are we now?  Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2002;30334- 337PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
 Manufacturer's Manual. Version 7.4.  Port, Switzerland SMT Swiss Microtechnology AG 2004;
19.
Kniestedt  CNee  MStamper  RL Dynamic contour tonometry: a comparative study on human cadaver eyes.  Arch Ophthalmol 2004;1221287- 1293PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
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
21.
Kanngiesser  HEKniestedt  CRobert  YC Dynamic contour tonometry: presentation of a new tonometer.  J Glaucoma 2005;14344- 350PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
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
23.
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
24.
Pache  MWilmsmeyer  SLautebach  SFunk  J Dynamic contour tonometry versus Goldmann applanation tonometry: a comparative study.  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2005;243763- 767PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Kaufmann  CBachmann  LMThiel  MA Intraocular pressure measurements using dynamic contour tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis.  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;443790- 3794PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
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
27.
Bland  JMAltman  DG Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.  Lancet 1986;1307- 310PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
28.
Duba  IWirthlin  AC Dynamic contour tonometry for post-LASIK intraocular pressure measurements.  Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 2004;221347- 350PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
29.
Kamppeter  BAJonas  JB Dynamic contour tonometry for intraocular pressure measurement.  Am J Ophthalmol 2005;140318- 320PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
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
31.
Feltgen  NLeifert  DFunk  J Correlation between central corneal thickness, applanation tonometry, and direct intracameral IOP readings.  Br J Ophthalmol 2001;8585- 87PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
Marx  WMadjlessi  FReinhard  TAlthaus  CSundmacher  R More than 4 years' experience with electronic intraocular needle tonometry [in German].  Ophthalmologe 1999;96498- 502PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
33.
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
34.
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
35.
Wang  JJMitchell  PSimpson  JMCumming  RGSmith  W Visual impairment, age-related cataract, and mortality.  Arch Ophthalmol 2001;1191186- 1190PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
36.
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
37.
Baudouin  CPisella  PJFillacier  K  et al.  Ocular surface inflammatory changes induced by topical antiglaucoma drugs: human and animal studies.  Ophthalmology 1999;106556- 563PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
38.
Liu  JRoberts  CJ Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurement: quantitative analysis.  J Cataract Refract Surg 2005;31146- 155PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
39.
Malik  NSMoss  SJAhmed  NFurth  AJWall  RSMeek  KM Ageing of the human corneal stroma: structural and biochemical changes.  Biochim Biophys Acta 1992;1138222- 228PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
40.
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
41.
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
Abstract

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.

×