2020Benha Medical JournalOpen access

Comparison of Intraocular Pressure Measurement by Goldmann Applanation Tonometer and Air Puff Tonometer in Silicone Filled Eyes.

Ashraf El Shayeb, Mohamed Nagy Elmohamady, Noha Kilany

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

Background: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements in silicone filled eyes by Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) and air puff tonometer (APT). Aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of APT by comparing the measurements of IOP made using it with those made using a GAT. Methods: In this prospective comparative study, 40 eyes with silicone oil tamponade were included. IOP was measured by GAT and air puff tonometer at least 1 month from vitrectomy. Results: in eyes with silicone oil, IOP was 21.35±12.34 mmHg and 19.46±5.29 mmHg using GAT and APT, respectively (p>0.05) and this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.074). In addition, no significant correlation was detected between IOP measurements using both techniques and gender, and lens status. Conclusion: It seems that GAT provided higher IOP measurements by 3.34 mmHg (95% CI = 2.15 to 4.53 mmHg) on average compared with APT but the difference between the two IOP measurements was statistically non-significant (p >0.05), in silicone filled eyes. The further assessment of available methods for IOP measurement could possibly establish the most accurate technique for IOP estimation in silicone filled eyes.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Background: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements in silicone filled eyes by Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) and air puff tonometer (APT). Aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of APT by comparing the measurements of IOP made using it with those made using a GAT. Methods: In this prospective comparative study, 40 eyes with silicone oil tamponade were included. IOP was measured by GAT and air puff tonometer at least 1 month from vitrectomy. Results: in eyes with silicone oil, IOP was 21.35±12.34 mmHg and 19.46±5.29 mmHg using GAT and APT, respectively (p>0.05) and this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.074). In addition, no significant correlation was detected between IOP measurements using both techniques and gender, and lens status. Conclusion: It seems that GAT provided higher IOP measurements by 3.34 mmHg (95% CI = 2.15 to 4.53 mmHg) on average compared with APT but the difference between the two IOP measurements was statistically non-significant (p >0.05), in silicone filled eyes. The further assessment of available methods for IOP measurement could possibly establish the most accurate technique for IOP estimation in silicone filled eyes.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Background: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements in silicone filled eyes by Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) and air puff tonometer (APT). Aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of APT by comparing the measurements of IOP made using it with those made using a GAT. Methods: In this prospective comparative study, 40 eyes with silicone oil tamponade were included. IOP was measured by GAT and air puff tonometer at least 1 month from vitrectomy. Results: in eyes with silicone oil, IOP was 21.35±12.34 mmHg and 19.46±5.29 mmHg using GAT and APT, respectively (p>0.05) and this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.074). In addition, no significant correlation was detected between IOP measurements using both techniques and gender, and lens status. Conclusion: It seems that GAT provided higher IOP measurements by 3.34 mmHg (95% CI = 2.15 to 4.53 mmHg) on average compared with APT but the difference between the two IOP measurements was statistically non-significant (p >0.05), in silicone filled eyes. The further assessment of available methods for IOP measurement could possibly establish the most accurate technique for IOP estimation in silicone filled eyes.

Key concepts: Goldmann Applanation Tonometer, Intraocular pressure, Ophthalmology, Medicine, Tamponade, Silicone oil, Applanation tonometry, Vitrectomy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of Intraocular Pressure Measurement by Goldmann Applanation Tonometer and Air Puff Tonometer in Silicone Filled Eyes. — Research Paper | ScholarLens