Young’s Modulus in Normal Corneas and the Effect on Applanation Tonometry

Objectives. To determine the statistically normal range of corneal Young’s modulus in young healthy eyes in vivo, and to establish if this variation has a clinically significant influence on intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement using applanation tonometry. Methods. Central corneal curvature, central corneal thickness (CCT), and applanation IOP (Goldmann tonometer) were measured using standard clinical techniques in one eye of 100 normal human subjects (22.0 ± 2.9 years) in vivo. The Orssengo-Pye algorithm was used to calculate the corneal Young’s modulus of these experimental subjects, and to produce a theoretical model of potential errors in Goldmann applanation tonometry estimates of IOP due to variations of Young’s modulus and CCT. Results. Corneal Young’s modulus was 0.29 ± 0.06 MPa [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.40 MPa]. According to the Orssengo-Pye model, the relationship between Young’s modulus and the error in applanation IOP is linear; the slope was 23 mm Hg per MPa. An increase from the minimum to the maximum value of the calculated limits of agreement (95% CI) of Young’s modulus caused a variation in applanation IOP of 5.35 mm Hg. The anticipated error at the extremes of the limits of agreement (95% CI) of CCT was similar at 4.67 mm Hg. Conclusion. Physiological variations in corneal Young’s modulus may cause clinically significant errors in Goldmann applanation tonometry estimates of IOP.

[1]  M. Whitacre,et al.  Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers. , 1993, Survey of ophthalmology.

[2]  R K Forster,et al.  Comparison of MacKay-Marg, Goldmann, and Perkins tonometers in abnormal corneas. , 1975, Archives of ophthalmology.

[3]  A. Elsheikh,et al.  Assessment of Corneal Biomechanical Properties and Their Variation with Age , 2007, Current eye research.

[4]  J. Hjortdal,et al.  Extensibility of the normo-hydrated human cornea. , 2009, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[5]  P. K. Jensen,et al.  In vitro measurement of corneal strain, thickness, and curvature using digital image processing. , 2009, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[6]  D. Pye,et al.  Determination of the true intraocular pressure and modulus of elasticity of the human cornea in vivo , 1999, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[7]  J. Parel,et al.  Effect of corneal hydration on Goldmann applanation tonometry and corneal topography. , 1993, Refractive & corneal surgery.

[8]  Erik Sjøntoft,et al.  In vivo determination of young's modulus for the human cornea , 1987, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[9]  N. Ehlers,et al.  APPLANATION TONOMETRY AND CENTRAL CORNEAL THICKNESS , 1975, Acta ophthalmologica.

[10]  Jun Liu,et al.  Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurement: Quantitative analysis , 2005, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[11]  Y Zeng,et al.  A comparison of biomechanical properties between human and porcine cornea. , 2001, Journal of biomechanics.

[12]  E. Spoerl,et al.  Effect of central corneal thickness, corneal curvature, and axial length on applanation tonometry. , 2006, Archives of ophthalmology.

[13]  M. R. Bryant,et al.  Constitutive laws for biomechanical modeling of refractive surgery. , 1996, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[14]  K. Buzard Introduction to biomechanics of the cornea. , 1992, Refractive & corneal surgery.

[15]  R. Moses The Goldmann applanation tonometer. , 1958, American journal of ophthalmology.

[16]  J. Hjortdal,et al.  On the biomechanical properties of the cornea with particular reference to refractive surgery. , 1998, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica. Supplement.

[17]  D. Luce Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer , 2005, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[18]  R. Stein,et al.  The effect of corneal thickness on applanation tonometry. , 1993, American journal of ophthalmology.

[19]  A. Elsheikh,et al.  Evaluation of Goldmann Applanation Tonometry Using a Nonlinear Finite Element Ocular Model , 2006, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[20]  A. Daxer,et al.  Collagen fibrils in the human corneal stroma: structure and aging. , 1998, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[21]  M. Doughty,et al.  Human corneal thickness and its impact on intraocular pressure measures: a review and meta-analysis approach. , 2000, Survey of ophthalmology.

[22]  S P Azen,et al.  Evaluation and comparison of sources of variability in the measurement of corneal thickness with ultrasonic and optical pachymeters. , 1983, Ophthalmic surgery.

[23]  W. A. Schlegel,et al.  Nonlinear material properties of intact cornea and sclera. , 1972, Experimental eye research.

[24]  P. McDonnell,et al.  An ultrasonic technique for the measurement of the elastic moduli of human cornea. , 1996, Journal of biomechanics.

[25]  K. Velten,et al.  Finite-element simulation of corneal applanation. , 2006, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[26]  G. W. Mertz Overnight swelling of the living human cornea. , 1980, Journal of the American Optometric Association.

[27]  E. Sherrard,et al.  Age-related changes of the corneal endothelium and stroma as seen in vivo by specular microscopy , 1987, Eye.

[28]  P R Greene,et al.  Comparison of mechanical properties of keratoconus and normal corneas. , 1982, Experimental eye research.

[29]  D. Garway-Heath,et al.  The relative effects of corneal thickness and age on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry , 2005, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[30]  H. Oxlund,et al.  Biomechanical properties of keratoconus and normal corneas. , 1980, Experimental eye research.

[31]  S. Cowin,et al.  Biomechanics: Mechanical Properties of Living Tissues, 2nd ed. , 1994 .