Background Accurate measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) after corneal refractive surgery is of great significance to clinic, and comparisons among various IOP measuring instruments are not rare, but there is a lack of unified analysis. Although Goldmann Applanation Tonometer (GAT) is currently the internationally recognized gold standard for IOP measurement, its results are severely affected by central corneal thickness (CCT). Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) takes certain biomechanical properties of cornea into account and is supposed to be less dependent of CCT. In this study, we conducted the meta-analysis to systematically assess the differences and similarities of IOP values measured by ORA and GAT in patients after corneal refractive surgery from the perspective of evidence-based medicine. Methods The authors searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of science, Cochrane library and Chinese electronic databases of CNKI and Wanfang) from Jan. 2005 to Jan. 2019, studies describing IOP comparisons measured by GAT and ORA after corneal refractive surgery were included. Quality assessment, subgroup analysis, meta-regression analysis and publication bias analysis were applied in succession. Results Among the 273 literatures initially retrieved, 8 literatures (13 groups of data) with a total of 724 eyes were included in the meta-analysis, and all of which were English literatures. In the pooled analysis, the weighted mean difference (WMD) between IOPcc and IOPGAT was 2.67 mmHg (95% CI: 2.20~3.14 mmHg, p < 0.0001), the WMD between IOPg and IOPGAT was − 0.27 mmHg (95% CI: − 0.70~0.16 mmHg, p = 0.2174). In the subgroup analysis of postoperative IOPcc and IOPGAT, the heterogeneity among the data on surgical procedure was zero, while the heterogeneity of other subgroups was still more than 50%. The comparison of the mean difference of pre- and post-operative IOP (∆IOP) was: mean-∆IOPg > mean-∆IOPGAT > mean-∆IOPcc. Conclusions IOPcc, which is less dependent on CCT, may be more close to the true IOP after corneal refractive surgery compared with IOPg and IOPGAT, and the recovery of IOPcc after corneal surface refractive surgery may be more stable than that after lamellar refractive surgery.

Background: Accurate measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) after corneal refractive surgery is of great significance to clinic, and comparisons among various IOP measuring instruments are not rare, but there is a lack of unified analysis. Although Goldmann Applanation Tonometer (GAT) is currently the internationally recognized gold standard for IOP measurement, its results are severely affected by central corneal thickness (CCT). Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) takes certain biomechanical properties of cornea into account and is supposed to be less dependent of CCT. In this study, we conducted the meta-analysis to systematically assess the differences and similarities of IOP values measured by ORA and GAT in patients after corneal refractive surgery from the perspective of evidence-based medicine. Methods: The authors searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of science, Cochrane library and Chinese electronic databases of CNKI and Wanfang) from Jan. 2005 to Jan. 2019, studies describing IOP comparisons measured by GAT and ORA after corneal refractive surgery were included. Quality assessment, subgroup analysis, meta-regression analysis and publication bias analysis were applied in succession. Results: Among the 273 literatures initially retrieved, 8 literatures (13 groups of data) with a total of 724 eyes were included in the meta-analysis, and all of which were English literatures. In the pooled analysis, the weighted mean difference (WMD) between IOPcc and IOPGAT was 2.67 mmHg (95% CI: 2.20~3.14 mmHg, p < 0.0001), the WMD between IOPg and IOPGAT was -0.27 mmHg (95% CI: -0.70~0.16 mmHg, p = 0.2174). In the subgroup analysis of postoperative IOPcc and IOPGAT, the heterogeneity among the data on surgical procedure was zero, while the heterogeneity of other subgroups was still more than 50%. The comparison of the mean difference of pre- and post-operative IOP (∆IOP) was: mean-∆IOPg > mean-∆IOPGAT > mean-∆IOPcc. Conclusions: IOPcc, which is less dependent on CCT, may be more close to the true IOP after corneal refractive surgery compared with IOPg and IOPGAT, and the recovery of IOPcc after corneal surface refractive surgery may be more stable than that after lamellar refractive surgery.

Meniere’s disease is a progressive hearing–disabling condition. Patients can benefit from strict clinical management, including lifestyle and dietary counseling, and medical treatment. A prospective cohort study was carried out with 154 patients with definite Meniere’s disease, with an average age of 43.53 ± 11.40, and a male to female ratio of 0.97:1. The pure-tone thresholds of all 165 affected ears, over a one-year clinical management period, were analyzed. After one year, 87.27% of patients had improved or preserved their hearing at a low frequency, and 71.51% at a high frequency. The hearing threshold at frequencies from 250 Hz to 2000 Hz had improved significantly (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.01), and deteriorated slightly at 8000 Hz (p < 0.05). Of all the patients, 40.00% had a hearing average threshold that reached ≤ 25 dB HL after the clinical management period, among whom 27.27% were patients in stage 3. The restoration time was 2.5 (1.0, 4.125) months, with a range of 0.5–11.0 months, and the restoration time was longer for stage 3 than for stages 1 and 2 (u = −2.542, p < 0.05). The rising curves improved the most (p < 0.05), with most becoming peaks, whereas most peaks and flats remained the same. Patients who were initially in the earlier stages (95% CI 1.710~4.717, OR 2.840, p < 0.001), have an increased odds ratio of hearing by an average of ≤25 dB HL. Age (95% CI 1.003~1.074, OR 1.038, p = 0.031), peak curve (95% CI 1.038~5.945, OR = 2.484, p = 0.041), and flat curve (95% CI 1.056~19.590, OR = 4.549, p = 0.042), compared with the rising curve, increase the odds ratio of hearing on average by > 25 dB HL. Most patients can have their hearing preserved or improved through strict clinical management, and sufficient follow-up is also essential. Stage 3 patients also have the potential for hearing improvement, although the restoration time is longer than in the early stages. The initial hearing stage, age, and audiogram pattern are related to the hearing benefits.