Comparison of central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure measured with two different tono/pachymeter devices in non-glaucomatouse children

Abstract

Purpose:

The goal of this research is to compare the intraocular pressure (IOP) and the mean central corneal thickness (CCT) values obtained from the measurements with Nidek NT-530P and Canon TX-20P devices with the values obtained by ultrasound pachymetry (UP) and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) in children.

Methods:

This prospective study was conducted with 119 healthy children. The measurements were repeated three times for each eye. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the correlation between the measurements obtained from different devices. The Bland–Altman plot was used to analyze the agreement between two different devices graphically. The measurements were taken in the same order in all subjects: TX-20P, NT-530P, UP, and GAT.

Results:

The mean age of the children was 10.1 ± 3.2 (6–17) years. The mean CCT values for the eyes were 568.90 and 569.68 (TX-20P), 571.44 and 566.37 (NT-530P), 564.77 and 564.67 μm UP, (right and left, respectively). The highest correspondence observed for CCT was between UP and NT-530P devices (ICC, 0.982, the left eye). The mean IOP measurements for Canon TX-20P, NT-530P, and GAT were 16.5 ± 3.2, 16.3 ± 3.2, and 16.8 ± 3.6 mmHg for the right eyes, respectively, while those for the left eyes were 16.6 ± 3.1, 16.2 ± 3.3, and 16.8 ± 3.7 mmHg. The highest correspondence was noted between measurements obtained using GAT and Nidek NT-530P devices (ICC, 0.945, in the left eye).

Conclusion:

Tono/pachymetry devices in the healthy children are provides significant agreements with the gold standard methods for IOP and CCT measurements.

Clinical Trial Registration number: 2016-94

Keywords

Canon TX-20P Nidek NT-530P intraocular pressure central corneal thickness ultrasound pachymeter

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allingham

Shields

Damji

. An overview of glaucoma. In: R

Allingham

Damji

Freedman

(eds.) Shield’s textbook of glaucoma. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005, pp.1–2.

Goldmann

Schmidt

Applanation tonometry. Ophthalmologica 1957; 134: 221–242.

Ehlers

Hansen

Aasved

Biometric correlations of corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol 1975; 53: 652–659.

Gordon

Beiser

Brandt

, et al. The ocular hypertension treatment study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2002; 120: 714–720.

Whitacre

Stein

Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers. Surv Ophthalmol 1993; 38: 1–30.

Kniestedt

Lin

Choe

, et al. Clinical comparison of contour and applanation tonometry and their relationship to pachymetry. Arch Ophthalmol 2005; 123: 1532–1537.

García-Resúa

Giráldez Fernández

Yebra-Pimentel

, et al. Clinical evaluation of the Canon TX-10 noncontact tonometer in healthy eyes. Eur J Ophthalmol 2010; 20: 523–530.

Beutelspacher

Serbecic

Scheuerle

AF.

Assessment of central corneal thickness using OCT, ultrasound, optical low coherence reflectometry and Scheimpflug pachymetry. Eur J Ophthalmol 2011; 21: 132–137.

Sedaghat

Daneshvar

Kargozar

, et al. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurement using ultrasonic pachymetry, rotating Scheimpflug camera, and scanning-slit topography. Am J Ophthalmol 2010; 150: 780–789.

10.

Barkana

Gerber

Elbaz

, et al. Central corneal thickness measurement with the Pentacam Scheimpflug system, optical low-coherence reflectometry pachymeter, and ultrasound pachymetry. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005; 31: 1729–1735.

11.

Chakrabarti

Craig

Brahma

, et al. Comparison of corneal thickness measurements using ultrasound and Orbscan slit-scanning topography in normal and post-LASIK eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001; 27: 1823–1828.

12.

Lattimore

Jr.

Influence of extended soft contact lens wear on the comparative measurement of central corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1996; 74: 239–242.

13.

Chen

Huang

Wen

, et al. Measurement of central corneal thickness by high resolution scheimpflug imaging, Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography and ultrasound pachymetry. Acta Ophthalmol 2012; 90: 449–455.

14.

Nemeth

Tsorbatzoglou

Kertesz

, et al. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with a new optical device and a standard ultrasonic pachymeter. J Cataract Refract Surg 2006; 32: 460–463.

15.

Paul

Lim

Starr

, et al. Central corneal thickness measured by the Orbscan II system, contact ultrasound pachymetry, and the Artemis 2 system. J Cataract Refract Surg 2008; 34: 1906–1912.

16.

Solomon

OD.

Corneal indentation during ultrasonic pachometry. Cornea 1999; 18: 214–215.

17.

Garcia-Resua

Blanco

Miñones

, et al. Accuracy and repeatability of a new tono-pachymeter for measuring central corneal thickness. Eye Contact Lens 2012; 38: 158–163.

18.

Fujimura

Kamiya

Fujiwara

, et al. Repeatability and reproducibility of measurements NT-530P noncontact tono/pachymeter and correlation of central corneal thickness with intraocular pressure. BioMed Res Int 2013; 8: 1–5.

19.

García-Resúa

Pena-Verdeal

Miñones

, et al. Reliability of the non-contact tono-pachymeter tono/pachy NT-530P in healthy eyes. Clin Exp Optom 2013; 96: 286–294.

20.

Doughty

Zaman

ML.

Human corneal thickness and its impact on intraocular pressure measures: a review and meta-analysis approach. Surv Ophthalmol 2000; 44: 367–408.

21.

Haider

Mickler

Oliver

, et al. Age and racial variation in central corneal thickness of preschool and school-aged children. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 2008; 45: 227–233.

22.

Wei

Fan

Wang

, et al. Correlation analysis between central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure in juveniles in Northern China: the Jinan City Eye Study. PLoS One 2014; 9: 1–7.

23.

Zheng

Huang

, et al. Distribution of central and peripheral corneal thickness in Chinese children and adults: the Guangzhou twin eye study. Cornea 2008; 27: 776–781.

24.

Sakalar

Keklikci

Unlu

, et al. Distribution of central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure in a large population of turkish school children. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2012; 19: 83–88.

25.

Ucakhan

Ozkan

Kanpolat

Corneal thickness measurements in normal and keratoconic eyes: pentacam comprehensive eye scanner versus noncontact specular microscopy and ultrasound pachymetry. J Cataract Refract Surg 2006; 32: 970–977.

26.

Al-Mezaine

Al-Amro

Kangave

, et al. Comparison between central corneal thickness measurements by oculus pentacam and ultrasonic pachymetry. Int Ophthalmol 2008; 28: 333–338.

27.

Jansson

Brautaset

Cerviño

, et al. A comparison of the Canon TX-20P™ non-contact tonometer and pachymeter in healthy eyes. Int J Ophthalmic Practice 2012; 3: 96–102.

28.

Hsu

Sheu

Hsu

, et al. Comparisons of intraocular pressure measurements: goldmann applanation tonometry, noncontact tonometry, Tono-Pen tonometry, and dynamic contour tonometry. Eye (Lond) 2009; 23: 1582–1588.

29.

Pensiero

Da Pozzo

Perissutti

, et al. Normal intraocular pressure in children. J Pediatric Ophthalmol Strabismus 1992; 29: 79–84.

30.

Osmera

Filous

Hlozanek

Central corneal thickness, intraocular pressure and their correlation in healthy Czech children aged 7–17 years. Cesk Slov Oftalmol 2009; 65: 19–23.

31.

Heidary

Gharebaghi

Wan Hitam

, et al. Central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure in Malay children. PLoS One 2011; 6: e25208.

32.

Krzyzanowska-Berkowska

Asejczyk-Widlicka

Pierscionek

Intraocular pressure in a cohort of healthy eastern European schoolchildren: variations in method and corneal thickness. BMC Ophthalmol 2012; 12: 61.

33.

Sihota

Tuli

Dada

Gupta

, et al. Distribution and determinants of intraocular pressure in a normal pediatric population. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 2006; 43: 14–18; quiz36–17.

34.

Lee

Saw

Gazzard

, et al. Intraocular pressure associations with refractive error and axial length in children. Br J Ophthalmol 2004; 88: 5–7.

35.

Doughty

Laiquzzaman

Muller

, et al. Central corneal thickness in European (white) individuals, especially children and the elderly, and assessment of its possible importance in clinical measures of intra- ocular pressure. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2002; 22: 491–504.