Évaluation clinique du tonomètre dynamique Icare®

Detry-Morel, M; Jamart, Jacques; Detry, M B; Pourjavan, S; Charlier, L.; Dethinne, B.; Huge, L.; Ledoux, A

doi:10.1016/s0181-5512(06)73907-9

Cited by 17 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In thick corneas, however, both tonometers were equally affected and overestimated IOP compared with GAT. The higher susceptibility of Icare ® to CCT was also observed in other studies 7,15,20,21 . However, some authors have reported that Icare ® measurements are statistically equal in the center (where the cornea is thinner) and in the periphery (where it is thicker) 22 and that these measurements are influenced by the corneal viscoelastic properties 23,24 .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…Patient comfort and the speed with which a reliable IOP measurement is obtained are greater using Icare ® than other instruments, 20,25 and although it was not assessed in this study, the convenience and confort of this instrument are easily perceived by an examiner with experience in these three methods. In addition, its precision and the fact that it does not require anesthetic drops make Icare ® an extremely practical instrument for daily clinical use.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison between rebound tonometer and Tono-Pen® in relation to Goldmann applanation tonometry and the influence of central corneal thickness on these three methods

Magela-Vieira¹,

Carvalho-Sousa²,

Pinto-Silva³

2019

RMOE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: to compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements from two different instruments, the rebound tonometer (Icare  ) and the Tono-Pen  XL (TP), with that from Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) and to determine the influence of central corneal thickness on these three instruments. Methods: 274 eyes from 137 healthy volunteers were evaluated in this cross-sectional study. All IOP measurements were made by the same examiner who was blinded to the observed result. Icare  tonometry was performed first, followed by TP, GAT, and pachymetry in a random order. Results: a good correlation was observed between IOP measurements obtained with Icare  and GAT (r = 0.79, p = 0.000) and between TP and GAT (r = 0.69, p = 0.000). Icare  and TP measurements were consistently higher than GAT measurements. A Bland-Altman plot indicated that the 95% limits of agreement between Icare  and GAT were 0.98 ± 3.12 (mean ± SD; range, −5.14 to 7.11) mmHg, and those between TP and GAT were 1. 88 ± 3.20 (range, −4.38 to 8.15) mmHg. In the group of patients with thinner corneas, Icare  overestimated IOP by 0.5mmHg compared with IOP obtained using GAT and by 1.8 mmHg compared with IOP obtained using TP. In the group of patients with thicker corneas, Icare  overestimated IOP by 1.4 mmHg compared IOP obtained using GAT and by 1.5 mmHg compared with IOP obtained using TP. Conclusion: IOP measurements obtained with Icare  and TP showed a good correlation with that of GAT. Both tonometers tend to overestimate IOP compared to GAT. In patients with thinner corneas, Icare  perfrmed better than TP.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Comparison between rebound tonometer and Tono-Pen® in relation to Goldmann applanation tonometry and the influence of central corneal thickness on these three methods

Magela-Vieira¹,

Carvalho-Sousa²,

Pinto-Silva³

2019

RMOE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite assessing IOP via different physical measuring principles, both applanation and rebound techniques are affected by corneal characteristics such as thickness or elasticity . While the Tono‐Pen Vet ® measures the force required to applanate a given area of the cornea, the TonoVet ® assesses IOP by quantifying the deceleration of a probe after its impact on the corneal surface .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical comparison of theTonoVet^®rebound tonometer and theTono‐PenVet^®applanation tonometer in dogs and cats with ocular disease: glaucoma or corneal pathology

Spiessen

Karck

Rohn

et al. 2013

Veterinary Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rebound tonometry appears to be a valuable alternative to established applanation tonometry in patients with ocular disease such as glaucoma and corneal disorders. In patients suffering from glaucoma, the same type of tonometer should be used for follow-up examinations, as measurement results of the TonoVet(®) and the Tono-Pen Vet(®) differ substantially with increasing IOP. Corneal pathology has considerable influence on both tonometers with the degree of over- or underestimation of IOP depending on the alteration of biomechanical properties of the cornea inflicted by various corneal pathologies.

show abstract

“…En las córneas gruesas, sin embargo, ambos tonómetros se vieron igualmente afectados y sobreestimaron la PIO en comparación con el TAG. La mayor susceptibilidad de Icare ® al GCC también se observó en otros estudios 7,15,20,21 . Sin embargo, algunos autores han informado que las medidas de Icare ® son estadísticamente iguales en el centro (donde la córnea es más delgada) y en la periferia (donde es más gruesa) 22 , y que estas mediciones están influenciadas por las propiedades viscoelásticas corneales 23,24 .…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…La comodidad del paciente y la velocidad con la que se obtiene una medición de PIO confiable son mayores al usar Icare ® que otros instrumentos 20,25 , y aunque no se evaluó en este estudio, la comodidad y el confort de este instrumento son percibidos fácilmente por un examinador con experiencia en estos tres métodos. Además, su precisión y el hecho de que no requiere gotas anestésicas hacen de Icare ® un instrumento extremadamente práctico para el uso clínico diario.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Comparación entre el tonómetro de rebote y el Tono-Pen® en relación con la tonometría de aplanación de Goldmann y la influencia del grosor corneal central en estos tres métodos

Magela-Vieira¹,

Carvalho-Sousa²,

Pinto-Silva³

2018

Revista Mexicana De Oftalmología

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparar las mediciones de la presión intraocular (PIO) de dos instrumentos diferentes, el tonómetro de rebote (Icare ® ) y el Tono-Pen ® XL (TP), con el tonómetro de aplanación de Goldmann (TAG), y determinar la influencia del grosor corneal central en estos tres instrumentos. Métodos: En este estudio transversal se evaluaron 274 ojos de 137 voluntarios sanos. Todas las mediciones de la PIO fueron hechas por el mismo examinador que estaba cegado al resultado observado. La tonometría Icare ® se realizó primero, seguida de TP, TAG y paquimetría en orden aleatorio. Resultados: Se observó una buena correlación entre las mediciones de PIO obtenidas con Icare ® y TAG (r = 0.79; p = 0.000) y entre TP y TAG (r = 0.69; p = 0.000). Las mediciones de Icare ® y TP fueron consistentemente más altas que las mediciones del TAG. Un diagrama de Bland-Altman indicó que los límites del 95% de concordancia entre Icare ® y TAG fueron de 0.98 ± 3.12 (media ± DE, rango, −5.14 a 7.11) mmHg, y entre TP y TAG fueron de 1.88 ± 3.20 (rango, −4.38 a 8.15) mmHg. En el grupo de pacientes con córneas más delgadas, Icare ® sobreestimó la PIO en 0.5 mmHg en comparación con la PIO obtenida utilizando TAG y en 1.8 mmHg en comparación con la PIO obtenida utilizando TP. En el grupo de pacientes con córneas más gruesas, Icare ® sobreestimó la PIO en 1.4 mmHg en comparación con la PIO obtenida utilizando TAG y en 1.5 mmHg en comparación con la PIO obtenida utilizando TP. Conclusión: Las mediciones de la PIO con Icare ® y TP mostraron una buena correlación con las del TAG. Ambos tonómetros tendieron a sobreestimar la PIO en comparación con TAG. En pacientes con córneas más delgadas, Icare ® fue mejor que TP.

show abstract

Évaluation clinique du tonomètre dynamique Icare®

Cited by 17 publications

References 21 publications

Comparison between rebound tonometer and Tono-Pen® in relation to Goldmann applanation tonometry and the influence of central corneal thickness on these three methods

Comparison between rebound tonometer and Tono-Pen® in relation to Goldmann applanation tonometry and the influence of central corneal thickness on these three methods

Clinical comparison of theTonoVet^®rebound tonometer and theTono‐PenVet^®applanation tonometer in dogs and cats with ocular disease: glaucoma or corneal pathology

Comparación entre el tonómetro de rebote y el Tono-Pen® en relación con la tonometría de aplanación de Goldmann y la influencia del grosor corneal central en estos tres métodos

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Évaluation clinique du tonomètre dynamique Icare®

Cited by 17 publications

References 21 publications

Comparison between rebound tonometer and Tono-Pen® in relation to Goldmann applanation tonometry and the influence of central corneal thickness on these three methods

Comparison between rebound tonometer and Tono-Pen® in relation to Goldmann applanation tonometry and the influence of central corneal thickness on these three methods

Clinical comparison of theTonoVet®rebound tonometer and theTono‐PenVet®applanation tonometer in dogs and cats with ocular disease: glaucoma or corneal pathology

Comparación entre el tonómetro de rebote y el Tono-Pen® en relación con la tonometría de aplanación de Goldmann y la influencia del grosor corneal central en estos tres métodos

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Clinical comparison of theTonoVet^®rebound tonometer and theTono‐PenVet^®applanation tonometer in dogs and cats with ocular disease: glaucoma or corneal pathology