Corneal Behavior during Tonometer Measurement during the Water Drinking Test in Eyes with XEN GelStent in Comparison to Non-Implanted Eyes

Biomechanics of the cornea have significant influences on the non-contact measurement of the intraocular pressure. The corneal behaviour during tonometry is a fundamental factor in estimating its value. The aim of the study was to analyse the behaviour of the cornea during tonometric measurement with the forced change in intraocular pressure during the water drinking test. Ocular Response Analyser (Reichert) was used to the measurement. Besides four basic parameters connected with intraocular pressure (IOPg, IOPcc) and biomechanics (corneal hysteresis CH and corneal resistance factor (CRF), other parameters representing the behaviour of the cornea during a puff of air were analysed. There were 47 eyes included in the study, including 27 eyes with a XEN GelStent implanted and 20 without it. The eyes of people with monocular implementation were the reference group. The values of analysed parameters were compared before and after 10, 25, 40, and 55 min after drinking the water. The intraocular pressure increased by 2.4 mmHg (p < 0.05) for eyes with a XEN stent and 2.2 mmHg for eyes without a stent (p < 0.05) in the tenth minute after drinking of water. This change caused a decreasing of corneal hysteresis (p < 0.05) without significant changes in the corneal resistance factor (p > 0.05). Corneal hysteresis changed similarly in the reference group and the group with a XEN GelStent. The analysis of additional parameters showed a difference in the behaviour of the cornea in eyes with a XEN GelStent in comparison to the corneas of eyes without a stent. This was particularly visible in the analysis of the cornea’s behaviour during the second applanation, when the cornea returns to its baseline state after deformation caused by air puff tonometry.

[1]  A. Jóźwik,et al.  Short-Time Changes of Intraocular Pressure and Biomechanics of the Anterior Segment of the Eye during Water Drinking Test in Patients with XEN GelStent , 2021, Journal of clinical medicine.

[2]  B. Cheraghian,et al.  Intraocular Pressure and Corneal Biomechanical Changes after Water-Drinking Test in Glaucoma Patients , 2021, Journal of current ophthalmology.

[3]  H. Kasprzak,et al.  Raw data from Ocular Response Analyzer applied for differentiation of normal and glaucoma patients , 2020 .

[4]  A. Mermoud,et al.  Impact of Combined XEN Gel Stent Implantation on Corneal Endothelial Cell Density: 2-Year Results. , 2019, Journal of glaucoma.

[5]  I. Helemejko,et al.  Efficacy of postoperative management with 5-fluorouracil injections after XEN Gel Stent implantation , 2019, International Ophthalmology.

[6]  B. McGuinness,et al.  Comparison of Goldmann applanation and Ocular Response Analyser tonometry: intraocular pressure agreement and patient preference , 2019, Eye.

[7]  Hiroshi Murata,et al.  The Relationship between the Waveform Parameters from the Ocular Response Analyzer and the Progression of Glaucoma. , 2018, Ophthalmology. Glaucoma.

[8]  M. Sridhar,et al.  Anatomy of cornea and ocular surface , 2018, Indian journal of ophthalmology.

[9]  A. Mermoud,et al.  XEN Gel Implant: a new surgical approach in glaucoma , 2018, Expert review of medical devices.

[10]  Bernardo T. Lopes,et al.  Discriminant Value of Custom Ocular Response Analyzer Waveform Derivatives in Forme Fruste Keratoconus. , 2016, American journal of ophthalmology.

[11]  Wenjing Wu,et al.  The Correlation Analysis between Corneal Biomechanical Properties and the Surgically Induced Corneal High-Order Aberrations after Small Incision Lenticule Extraction and Femtosecond Laser In Situ Keratomileusis , 2015, Journal of ophthalmology.

[12]  S. Yazdani,et al.  Corneal Biomechanical Changes Following Trabeculectomy, Phaco-trabeculectomy, Ahmed Glaucoma Valve Implantation and Phacoemulsification , 2014, Journal of ophthalmic & vision research.

[13]  D. Gatinel,et al.  Repeatability of Ocular Response Analyzer waveform parameters in normal eyes and eyes after refractive surgery. , 2013, Journal of refractive surgery.

[14]  O. Abitbol,et al.  Assessment of Corneal Biomechanical Properties in Normal Tension Glaucoma and Comparison With Open-angle Glaucoma, Ocular Hypertension, and Normal Eyes , 2012, Journal of glaucoma.

[15]  K. Aggarwal,et al.  Relationship between corneal biomechanical properties, central corneal thickness, and intraocular pressure across the spectrum of glaucoma. , 2012, American journal of ophthalmology.

[16]  A. Tafreshi,et al.  Association between corneal biomechanical properties and glaucoma severity. , 2012, American journal of ophthalmology.

[17]  D. Blumberg.  aSSOCIaTIOn BeTWeen COrneal BIOMeCHanICal PrOPerTIeS anD glauCOMa SeVerITy , 2012 .

[18]  O. Abitbol,et al.  Corneal hysteresis measured with the Ocular Response Analyzer® in normal and glaucomatous eyes , 2010, Acta ophthalmologica.

[19]  E. Feretis,et al.  Association between corneal hysteresis and central corneal thickness in glaucomatous and non‐glaucomatous eyes , 2009, Acta ophthalmologica.

[20]  Susana Molina-Castañer,et al.  Terminology and guidelines for glaucoma , 2009 .

[21]  S. Shah,et al.  Comparison of corneal biomechanics in pre and post-refractive surgery and keratoconic eyes by Ocular Response Analyser. , 2009, Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association.

[22]  Jianhua Wang,et al.  Diurnal Variation of Ocular Hysteresis, Corneal Thickness, and Intraocular Pressure , 2008, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[23]  C. Qualls,et al.  Ocular Response Analyzer in Subjects with and without Glaucoma , 2008, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[24]  Aachal Kotecha,et al.  What biomechanical properties of the cornea are relevant for the clinician? , 2007, Survey of ophthalmology.

[25]  A. Lam,et al.  Comparison of IOP Measurements Between ORA and GAT in Normal Chinese , 2007, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[26]  W. F. Harris.  Technical Note: Accounting for anatomical symmetry in the first‐order optical character of left and right eyes , 2007, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[27]  L. Laroche,et al.  [Ocular response analyzer: feasibility study and correlation with normal eyes]. , 2007, Journal francais d'ophtalmologie.

[28]  S. Salvi,et al.  Ageing changes in the eye , 2006, Postgraduate Medical Journal.

[29]  E. Myrowitz,et al.  High Interocular Corneal Symmetry in Average Simulated Keratometry, Central Corneal Thickness, and Posterior Elevation , 2005, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[30]  T. Realini,et al.  Symmetry of fellow-eye intraocular pressure responses to topical glaucoma medications. , 2005, Ophthalmology.

[31]  A. McKendrick,et al.  The Axis of Astigmatism in Right and Left Eye Pairs , 1997, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[32]  L. Perlemuter.  [From theory to practice]. , 1997, Soins. Psychiatrie.