Effectiveness of 4 tonometers in measuring IOP after femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK, SMILE, and transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy.

Autor:	Chen S; From the Eye Hospital (Chen, Zheng, J. Wang, Zhu, Y. Li, Q. Wang, H. Li, Bao), Institution of Ocular Biomechanics (Chen, Zheng, J. Wang, Q. Wang, Bao), WenZhou Medical University, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Ningbo Hangzhou Bay Hospital (Huang), NingBo, Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Biomedical Engineering, Beihang University (Elsheikh), Beijing, China; School of Engineering, University of Liverpool (Lopes, Elsheikh), Liverpool, National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology (Elsheikh), London, United Kingdom; Humanitas San Pio X Hospital (Vinciguerra), Milan, Italy., Lopes BT, Huang W, Zheng X, Wang J, Zhu R, Vinciguerra R, Li Y, Wang Q, Li H, Bao F, Elsheikh A
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Journal of cataract and refractive surgery [J Cataract Refract Surg] 2020 Jul; Vol. 46 (7), pp. 967-974.
DOI:	10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000204
Abstrakt:	Purpose: To test the performance of 4 tonometers in estimating intraocular pressure (IOP) after 3 forms of refractive surgery. Setting: Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, China. Design: Prospective case series. Methods: Patients matched for preoperative age, corneal thickness, and myopic correction enrolled for femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK), small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE), or transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (tPRK) were included in the study. For each patient, 4 measurements of IOP were obtained preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively, using the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT-IOP), the Dynamic Contour Tonometer (DCT-IOP), corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc) from the Ocular Response Analyzer, and biomechanically corrected IOP (bIOP) from the Corvis ST. Overall corneal stiffness was also estimated based on the stiffness parameter (SP-A1) provided by the Corvis ST. Results: The study included 144 eyes of 144 patients. Among the 3 procedures, the smallest variances between preoperative and postoperative IOP estimates and SP-A1 values were observed with the tPRK, followed by SMILE and FS-LASIK. In the tPRK group, no significant differences were observed in both bIOP (-0.18 ± 1.63 mm Hg) and DCT-IOP (-.64 ± 2.34 mm Hg), whereas they were larger and significant in GAT-IOP (-1.78 ± 2.29 mm Hg) and IOPcc (-2.77 ± 1.84 mm Hg). In FS-LASIK and SMILE groups, although there were similar significant reductions in IOP postoperatively, these reductions were still lower in bIOP and DCT-IOP than those in GAT-IOP and IOPcc. Conclusions: The bIOP and DCT-IOP were the least affected IOP estimates between the 3 refractive surgery procedures considered. It was evident that tPRK produced significantly smaller reductions in IOP readings than did FS-LASIK and SMILE.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu