Comparison and comparability of pneumotonometry and rebound tonometry results with Maklakov’s applanation tonometry

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Introduction and use of various tonometry methods can lead to misinterpretation of intraocular pressure results and influence the choice of treating approaches by ophthalmologist in a glaucoma patient.

AIM: To compare pneumotonometry and rebound tonometry results with Maklakov’s applanation tonometry and to develop corrections for their comparability.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 75 patients. All subjects underwent Maklakov applanation tonometry (10 g) and pachymetry (Topcon SP-3000P). In 48 patients (94 eyes) of the 1st group, pneumotonometry (TONOREF™ II Nidek) was performed, and 27 patients of the 2nd group (52 eyes) underwent rebound tonometry (iCare™ IC-100).

RESULTS: The mean difference in intraocular pressure level in the 1st group was –4.81 (p < 0.001), and in the 2nd –0.98 mmHg (p = 0.399). Both methods — pneumo- and rebound tonometry showed underestimated results with intraocular pressure less than 23.0 and 22.5 mmHg (respectively) relative to applanation tonometry and, conversely, overestimated intraocular pressure when these values were exceeded. A significant (p < 0.001) strong (R2 = 0.86) relationship between applanation and rebound tonometry was obtained, which made it possible, using regression analysis, to develop a formula for recalculating results of iCare tonometry into those of Maklakov tonometry: PMaklakov = 0.40 × PiCare + 13.44.

CONCLUSIONS: Both pneumo- and rebound tonometry demonstrate adequate results of P0 with intraocular pressure below 23.0 and 22.5 mmHg (respectively) and overestimate the results when these values are exceeded. The developed formula allows converting the results of iCare tonometry into the values of the Maklakov’s tonometry.

About the authors

Dmitrii F. Belov

St. Petersburg Multifield Hospital No. 2; Saint Petersburg State University

Author for correspondence.
Email: belovd1990@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0776-4065
SPIN-code: 2380-2273

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.), ophthalmologist

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg; Saint Petersburg

Natalia G. Zumbulidze

North-Western State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov

Email: guramovna@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7729-097X
SPIN-code: 4439-8855

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.), assistant professor

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Amina I. Yusupova

North-Western State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov

Email: aminausupova4821@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0009-0004-5562-204X
SPIN-code: 7522-8060

resident doctor

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Farhod O. Kasymov

St. Petersburg Multifield Hospital No. 2; North-Western State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov

Email: farkkas@yahoo.com
ORCID iD: 0009-0004-4368-143X
SPIN-code: 7778-6309

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.), ophthalmologist

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg; Saint Petersburg

References

  1. Bauer SM, Tipyasev AS. On the mathematical model of the measuring of the intraocular pressure by Maklakov method. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Mathematics. Mechanics. Astronomy. 2008;(4):98–100. (In Russ.)
  2. Аntonova АV, Nikolaenko VP, Brzheskiy VV, Vuks AJ. Factors influencing the effectiveness of trabeculectomy: following materials of the City Multidisciplinary Hospital No. 2. Ophthalmology Reports. 2022;15(4):35–44. (In Russ.) doi: 10.17816/OV159363
  3. Egorov EA. Natsional’noe rukovodstvo po glaukome dlya praktikuyushchikh vrachei. Egorov EA, Ericheva VP, editors. Moscow: GEHOTAR-Media, 2019. 384 p. (In Russ.) doi: 10.33029/9704-5442-8-GLA-2020-1-384
  4. Dorofeev DA, Pozdeeva OG, Ekgardt VF, et al. Ophthalmotonometric indicators measured by maklakov applanation tono meter and rebound tonometer. Reflection. 2018;2(7):27–32. (In Russ.) doi: 10.25276/2686-6986-2018-2-27-32
  5. Maklakov AN. Oftalmotonometriya. “Khirurgicheskaya letopis’”. 1892;(6):35. (In Russ.)
  6. Kontiola AI. A new induction-based impact method for measuring intraocular pressure. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2000;78(2): 142–145. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0420.2000.078002142.x
  7. Volkova NV, Yurieva TN, Shvetz LV, Mikhalevich IM. Correlation and correction factors for different types of tonometry. Report 1. National Journal glaucoma. 2015;14(3):11–18. (In Russ.)
  8. Davies LN, Bartlett H, Mallen EA, Wolffsohn JS. Clinical evaluation of rebound tonometer. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2006;84(2): 206–209. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0420.2005.00610.x
  9. Hsu S-Y, Sheu M-M, Hsu A-H, et al. Comparisons of intraocular pressure measurements: Goldmann applanation tonometry, noncontact tonometry, Tono-Pen tonometry, and dynamic contour tono metry. Eye (Lond). 2009;23(7):1582–1588. doi: 10.1038/eye.2009.77
  10. Astakhov YS, Akopov EL, Potyomkin VV. Аpplanation and dynamic contour tonometry: a comparative analysis. Ophthalmology Reports. 2008;1(1):4–10. (In Russ.)
  11. Tonnu PA, Ho T, Newson T, et al. The influence of central corneal thickness and age on intraocular pressure measured by pneumotonometry, non-contact tonometry, the Tono-Pen XL, and Goldmann applanation tonometry. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89(7):851–854. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2004.056622
  12. Mangouritsas G, Mourtzoukos S, Mantzounis A, Alexopulos L. Comparison of Goldmann and Pascal tonometry in relation to corneal hysteresis and central corneal thickness in nonglaucomatous eyes. Clin Ophthalmol. 2011;5:1071–1077. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S23086
  13. Machekhin VA, L’vov VA. K voprosu o sopostavimosti rezul’tatov issledovaniya istinnogo vnutriglaznogo davleniya po dannym pnevmotonometra Reichert 7CR. Vestnik TGU. 2015;20(4):776–780. (In Russ.)
  14. Avetisov SE, Bubnova IA, Antonov AA. The study of the effect of the corneal biomechanical properties on the intraocular pressure measurement. Byulleten Sibirskogo otdeleniya Rossiiskoi akademii meditsinskikh nauk. 2009;29(4):30–33. (In Russ.)
  15. Halkiadakis I, Stratos A, Stergiopoulos G, et al. Evaluation of the Icare-ONE rebound tonometer as a self-measuring intraocular pressure device in normal subjects. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2012;250(8):1207–1211. doi: 10.1007/s00417-011-1875-6

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Dependence of Maklakov’s applanation tonometry from pneumotonometry

Download (101KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. Dependence of Maklakov’s applanation tonometry from rebound tonometry (iCare)

Download (78KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. Dependence of pneumotonometry values from central corneal thickness (R2 = 0.07; p = 0.017)

Download (88KB)
Indexing metadata
5. Fig. 4. Dependence of rebound tonometry (iCare) values from central corneal thickness (R2 = 0.01; p = 0.420)

Download (75KB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2023 Belov D.F., Zumbulidze N.G., Yusupova A.I., Kasymov F.O.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
 


This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies