Agreement of intraocular pressure measurement with Corvis ST, non-contact tonometer, and Goldmann applanation tonometer in children with ocular hypertension and related factors
Authors:   Ophthalmic Hospital of Tangshan, Tangshan 063000, Hebei Province, China, Li Hou-Gang , Lin Fang ,   Tianjin Jizhou District Tianyi Vision Hospital, Tianjin 300070, China, Li Si-Yu ,   Ophthalmic Hospital of Tangshan, Tangshan 063000, Hebei Province, China, Liu Qing-Hua ,   Ophthalmic Hospital of Tangshan, Tangshan 063000, Hebei Province, China, Yin Chun-Ge ,   Ophthalmic Hospital of Tangshan, Tangshan 063000, Hebei Province, China, Chen Xi-Yue ,   Ophthalmic Hospital of Tangshan, Tangshan 063000, Hebei Province, China, Zhang Xin-Jie ,   Ophthalmic Hospital of Tangshan, Tangshan 063000, Hebei Province, China, Qu Yue ,   Ophthalmic Hospital of Tangshan, Tangshan 063000, Hebei Province, China, Hui Yan-Nian ,   Department of Ophthalmology, Xijing Hospital, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi&#x2019;an 710023, Shaanxi Province, China
Published: September 2023

AIM: To access the agreement of intraocular pressure (IOP) values obtained from biomechanically corrected tonometer [Corvis ST (CST)], non-contact tonometer (NCT), and Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) in children with NCT measured-IOP (NCT-IOP) values of 22 mm Hg or more, and related factors.
METHODS: A total of 51 eyes with NCT-IOP≥22 mm Hg in children aged 7 to 14y were examined and IOP was measured by CST, NCT, and GAT. Based on GAT measured IOP (GAT-IOP), ocular hypertension (OHT) group (≥22 mm Hg, 24 eyes) and the non-OHT group (<22 mm Hg, 27 eyes) were defined. We compared the agreement of the three measurements, i.e., CST measured IOP (CST-IOP), GAT-IOP, and NCT-IOP, and further analyzed the correlation between the differences in tonometry readings, central corneal thickness (CCT), axial length (AL), optic disc rim volume, and age.
RESULTS: Compared with the OHT group, thicker CCT, larger rim volume, and higher differences between NCT-IOP and GAT-IOP, were found in the non-OHT group. The differences between CST-IOP and GAT-IOP were lower than the differences between NCT-IOP and GAT-IOP in both groups. The mean differences in CST-IOP and GAT-IOP were 1.26 mm Hg (95% limit of agreement ranged from 0.1 to 2.41 mm Hg, OHT group) and 1.20 mm Hg (95% limit of agreement ranged from -0.5 to 3.00 mm Hg, non-OHT group), and the mean differences in NCT and GAT were 3.90 mm Hg (95% limit of agreement ranged from -0.19 to 9.70 mm Hg, OHT group) and 6.00 mm Hg (95% limit of agreement ranged from 1.50 to 10.50 mm Hg, non-OHT group). The differences between CST-IOP and GAT-IOP were not related to CCT, age, and AL in both groups; while the differences between NCT-IOP and GAT-IOP were related to CCT in the OHT group (r=0.93, P<0.001) and to CCT and AL in the non-OHT group (r=0.66, P<0.001, r=-0.81, P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: The accuracy of NCT in the diagnosis of pediatric OHT is low. The agreement of CST-IOP and GAT-IOP was significantly higher in children with and without OHT than in those with NCT-IOP and GAT-IOP. Therefore, CST can be used as a good alternative for IOP measurement in children. The impacts of CCT and AL on NCT measurement need to be fully considered when managing childhood IOP.