Journal of the Egyptian Ophthalmological Society

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year
: 2013  |  Volume : 106  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 249--252

Evaluation of corneal biomechanics using ocular response analyzer for normal and primary open angle glaucoma eyes


Mohamed A El-Malah 
 Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Mohamed A El-Malah
MD, PhD, 252 St. Terat El Gabl, Hadayek El Zayton, Al-Azhar University, Cairo
Egypt

Purpose The aim of the study was to evaluate the differences in intraocular pressure measurements using the applanation Goldmann method (IOPg), in intraocular pressure after compensation of the cornea (IOPcc), in corneal hysteresis (CH), and in corneal resistance factor (CRF) between healthy individuals and patients diagnosed as primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) using ocular response analyzer (ORA). Patients and methods Ninety-four eyes of 94 individuals, 45 male individuals and 49 female individuals, were classified into two equal groups: the POAG (47 eyes) group and the normal (47 eyes) control group. Their mean age was 54 ± 7.1 years and 55 ± 7.8 years, respectively. All measures for the four selected parameters (IOPg, IOPcc, CH, and CRF) were performed using an ORA machine for all eyes. Statistical analysis was made using the Student t-test to search for any significant difference between the two groups. Results All parameters including IOPg, IOPcc, CH, and CRF were measured and their mean values were calculated. In normal eyes, the mean of IOPg was 15.8 ± 1.3 mmHg, that of IOPcc was 14.7 ± 0.2 mmHg, that of CH was 11.6 ± 1.2 mmHg, and that of CRF was 12.4 ± 1.8 mmHg, whereas in eyes presented with POAG, the mean of IOPg was 23.6 ± 2.6 mmHg, that of IOPcc was 26.8 ± 2.4 mmHg, that of CH was 8.4 ± 2.3 mmHg, and that of CRF was 9.4 ± 0.6 mmHg; there was a significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion In this study, the selected parameters such as IOPg and IOPcc had higher readings and CH and CRF had lower readings in glaucomatous eyes and vice versa in normal eyes. The low readings of intraocular pressure in POAG eyes were most probably because of low readings of CH and CRF. Studies with larger sample size are needed to support the results and more accurately evaluate the ORA machine and its role in early detection of glaucoma patients.


How to cite this article:
El-Malah MA. Evaluation of corneal biomechanics using ocular response analyzer for normal and primary open angle glaucoma eyes.J Egypt Ophthalmol Soc 2013;106:249-252


How to cite this URL:
El-Malah MA. Evaluation of corneal biomechanics using ocular response analyzer for normal and primary open angle glaucoma eyes. J Egypt Ophthalmol Soc [serial online] 2013 [cited 2020 Oct 20 ];106:249-252
Available from: http://www.jeos.eg.net/article.asp?issn=2090-0686;year=2013;volume=106;issue=4;spage=249;epage=252;aulast=El-Malah;type=0