A Comparison of the Corrected Intraocular Pressure Obtained by the Corvis ST and Reichert 7CR Tonometers in Glaucoma Patients.
A Comparison of the Corrected Intraocular Pressure Obtained by the Corvis ST and Reichert 7CR Tonometers in Glaucoma Patients.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0170206
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Okimoto S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nakao Y;Kiuchi Y;Okimoto S
本研究旨在研究Corvis Scheimpflug Technology（CST）-IOPpachy和使用Reichert 7 CR（7 CR）眼压计通过角膜补偿IOP（IOPcc）测量的两种矫正眼压（IOP）的准确性。我们还研究了角膜解剖和结构参数对IOP测量的影响。参与者包括90名原发性开角型青光眼患者。我们使用配对t检验（Bonferroni校正）、Bland-Altman图和多元回归分析评估了CST、7 CR和Goldmann压平眼压计（GAT）获得的IOP测量值。7 CR-IOPcc给出的值最高（15.5 ± 2.7 mmHg），其次是7 CR-IOPg（13.7 ± 3.1 mmHg）、GAT-IOP（13.6 ± 2.2 mmHg）、CST-IOP（10.3 ± 2.6 mmHg）和CST-IOPpachy（9.7 ± 2.5 mmHg）。CST-IOPpachy的测量值明显低于其他眼压测量方法的测量值（均P < 0.01）。7 CR-IOPcc的值显著高于通过其他IOP测量方法获得的值（所有，p < 0.01）。Bland-Altman图显示GAT-IOP与其他IOP测量值（CST-IOP、CST-IOPpachy、7 CR-IOPg和7 CR-IOPcc）之间的平均差异，分别为−3.20、−3.82、0.14和2.00 mmHg。所有对IOP测量值之间95%一致性限值的宽度均大于3 mmHg。除7 CR-IOPcc外，所有IOP变化均由涉及性别、平均角膜曲率和中央角膜厚度的回归系数解释。通过GAT、CST和7 CR获得的IOP值不可互换。每种针对眼部结构进行校正的新IOP测量装置都有其自身的局限性。
The purpose of the study was to investigate the accuracy of two corrected intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements by Corvis Scheimpflug Technology (CST)-IOPpachy and by corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc) using the Reichert 7CR (7CR) tonometers. We also investigated the effects of corneal anatomical and structural parameters on the IOP measurements. The participants included 90 primary open-angle glaucoma patients. We assessed the IOP measurements, obtained by the CST, 7CR, and Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), using a paired t-test with Bonferroni correction, Bland-Altman plots, and multiple regression analyses. The 7CR-IOPcc gave the highest value (15.5 ± 2.7 mmHg), followed by the 7CR-IOPg (13.7 ± 3.1 mmHg), GAT-IOP (13.6 ± 2.2 mmHg), CST-IOP (10.3 ± 2.6 mmHg), and CST-IOPpachy (9.7 ± 2.5 mmHg). The values of CST-IOPpachy were significantly lower than those obtained by the other IOP measurement methods (all, p < 0.01). The values of 7CR-IOPcc were significantly higher than those obtained by the other IOP measurement methods (all, p < 0.01). Bland-Altman plots showed a mean difference between the GAT-IOP and the other IOP measurements (CST-IOP, CST-IOPpachy, 7CR-IOPg, and 7CR-IOPcc), which were −3.20, −3.82, 0.14, and 2.00 mmHg, respectively. The widths of the 95% limits of agreement between all pairs of IOP measurements were greater than 3 mmHg. With the exception of the 7CR-IOPcc, all of the IOP variations were explained by regression coefficients involving gender, average corneal curvature, and central corneal thickness. The IOP values obtained by the GAT, CST, and 7CR were not interchangeable. Each new IOP measurement device that was corrected for ocular structure had its own limitations.