The site of the Media Sphera Publishers contains materials intended solely for healthcare professionals.
By closing this message, you confirm that you are a certified medical professional or a student of a medical educational institution.

Login
EN
+7 (495) 482-4118
+7 (495) 482-4329
+8 800 250-18-12
  • (toll-free number for subscriptions)
    Mon-Fri from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.

  • © 1998-2026
+7 (495) 482-43-29
EN
All journals
Journal
Year
Year
Search result: 0

Avetisov S.E.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Disease;
I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)

Averich V.V.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases;
National Myopia Institute

Volzhanin A.V.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases

Antonov A.A.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases

Borisenko T.E.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases

Kosova J.V.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases

Vitkov A.A.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases

Budnikova E.A.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases

Comparative evaluation of tonometry methods in keratoconus

Authors:

Avetisov S.E., Averich V.V., Volzhanin A.V., Antonov A.A., Borisenko T.E., Kosova J.V., Vitkov A.A., Budnikova E.A.

More about the authors

Journal: Russian Annals of Ophthalmology. 2025;141(6): 7‑13

DOI: 10.17116/oftalma20251410617

Read: 570 times

Buy for 300₽
Contact the author
Table of contents

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF TONOMETRY METHODS IN KERATOCONUS
COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF TONOMETRY METHODS IN KERATOCONUS

To cite this article:

Avetisov SE, Averich VV, Volzhanin AV, et al. Comparative evaluation of tonometry methods in keratoconus. Russian Annals of Ophthalmology. 2025;141(6):7‑13. (In Russ.)
https://doi.org/10.17116/oftalma20251410617

Подписка 2026 Вестник офтальмологии (Russian Annals of Ophthalmology)
МСФ на ЯМ
Использование инфографики авторами научных работ
Recommended articles:
Femtosecond laser-assisted intrastromal kera­toplasty with biosynthetic complex implantation for kera­toconus (preliminary report). Russian Annals of Ophthalmology. 2025;(4):73-79
The effect of initial conservative hypo­tensive therapy on the outcomes of sele­ctive laser trabeculoplasty in primary open-angle glaucoma. Russian Annals of Ophthalmology. 2025;(5):16-22
Modern devi­ces for microinvasive glaucoma surgery. Russian Annals of Ophthalmology. 2025;(5):101-108
Abstract:

The chronic course of keratoconus (KC) and the associated structural and functional changes in the cornea complicate the interpretation of intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements. A promising approach is to analyze tonometric data with consideration of the variability of corneal biomechanical (viscoelastic) properties and thickness rather than disease stage. This is supported by clinical observations showing a wide variation in IOP values even within the same stage of KC.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to comparatively evaluate tonometric readings obtained by different devices in KC based on corneal biomechanical characteristics and thickness.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 167 patients (334 eyes) with bilateral KC (mean age 31.0±8.8 years) were examined. Three subgroups were formed according to data from bidirectional pneumotonometry (Ocular Response Analyzer, ORA) and non-contact tonometry (Corvis ST with Scheimpflug imaging), taking into account corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), and central corneal thickness (CCT). IOP was measured by pneumotonometry, bidirectional pneumotonometry (ORA), rebound tonometry (RT), dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), and Maklakov tonometry.

The analysis assumed that, excluding structural changes in the cornea in young subjects, differences in IOP values between subgroups would be minimal. Thus, the observed deviations were attributed mainly to biomechanical changes in KC, where lower tonometric readings reflected greater dependence of IOP on the degree of corneal deformation.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences (p<0.05) in tonometry readings between subgroups confirmed the substantial impact of corneal biomechanical parameters and thickness on IOP measurements in KC. The greatest variability (39—50%) was observed with pneumotonometry and bidirectional pneumotonometry (Goldmann-correlated IOP, IOPg, by ORA). In these cases, lower IOP values correlated with poorer biomechanical status of the cornea and lower CCT. For other methods (corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc) by ORA, RT, DCT, and Maklakov tonometry), the variability was less pronounced and did not exceed 26%.

CONCLUSION

Regardless of the method used to assess intraocular pressure, alterations in corneal biomechanics in KC result in underestimation of IOP values.

Keywords:

keratoconus
corneal biomechanical parameters
tonometry
intraocular pressure
tonometry readings

Authors:

Avetisov S.E.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Disease;
I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)

Averich V.V.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases;
National Myopia Institute

Volzhanin A.V.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases

Antonov A.A.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases

Borisenko T.E.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases

Kosova J.V.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases

Vitkov A.A.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases

Budnikova E.A.

Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases

Received:

31.03.2025

Accepted:

11.07.2025

Close metadata

References:

  1. Andreassen TT, Simonsen AH, Oxlund H. Biomechanical properties of keratoconus and normal corneas. Exp Eye Res. 1980;31(4):435-441.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0014-4835(80)80027-3
  2. Nash IS, Greene PR, Foster CS. Comparison of mechanical properties of keratoconus and normal corneas. Exp Eye Res. 1982;35(5):413-424.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-4835(82)90040-9
  3. Zhang L, Danesh J, Tannan A, Phan V, Yu F, Hamilton DR. Second-generation corneal deformation signal waveform analysis in normal, forme fruste keratoconic, and manifest keratoconic corneas after statistical correction for potentially confounding factors. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015;41(10):2196-2204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.11.011
  4. Kirwan C, O’Malley D, O’Keefe M. Corneal hysteresis and corneal resistance factor in keratoectasia: findings using the Reichert ocular response analyzer. Ophthalmologica. 2008;222(5):334-337.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000145333
  5. Bubnova IA, Averich VV, Belousova EV. Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on IOP indices in patients with keratoconus. The EYE GLAZ. 2019;21(4(128)):15-19 (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.33791/2222-4408-2019-4-15-19
  6. Shah S, Laiquzzaman M, Bhojwani R, Mantry S, Cunliffe I. Assessment of the biomechanical properties of the cornea with the ocular response analyzer in normal and keratoconic eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48(7): 3026-3031. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.04-0694
  7. Antonov AA, Karlova EV, Brezhnev AYu, Dorofeev DA. Current state of ophthalmic tonometry. Russian Annals of Ophthalmology=Vestnik oftal’mologii. 2020;136(6):100-107 (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/oftalma2020136061100
  8. Avetisov SE, Petrov SYu, Bubnova IA, Antonov AA, Avetisov KS. Influence of central corneal thickness on the results of tonometry (review). Russian Annals of Ophthalmology=Vestnik oftal’mologii. 2008;124(5):1-7 (In Russ.).
  9. Roberts CJ. Importance of accurately assessing biomechanics of the cornea. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2016;27(4):285-291.  https://doi.org/10.1097/ICU.0000000000000282
  10. Firat PG, Orman G, Doganay S, Demirel S. Influence of corneal parameters in keratoconus on IOP readings obtained with different tonometers. Clin Exp Optom. 2013;96(2):233-237.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cxo.12016
  11. Alvani A, Hashemi H, Pakravan M, Yaseri M, Jafarzadehpur E, Fotouhi A. Correction methods for noncontact intraocular pressure measurement in patients with keratoconus and healthy individuals. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2022; 85(5):490-497.  https://doi.org/10.5935/0004-2749.20220072
  12. Avetisov SE, Bubnova IA, Novikov IA, Antonov AA, Siplivy VI, Kuznetsov AV. Biometric parameters of fibrous treatment and biomechanical indicators. Message 1. Measurement of the anteroposterior axis, thickness and curvature of the cornea. Russian Annals of Ophthalmology=Vestnik oftal’mologii. 2011;127(3):3-5 (In Russ.).
  13. Fontes BM, Ambrósio R Jr, Velarde GC, Nosé W. Ocular response analyzer measurements in keratoconus with normal central corneal thickness compared with matched normal control eyes. J Refract Surg. 2011;27(3):209-215.  https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20100415-02
  14. Altinkaynak H, Kocasarac C, Dundar H, Sayin N, Kara N, Bozkurt E, Duru N. Which tonometry in eyes with keratoconus? Eye (Lond). 2016;30(3):431-437.  https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2015.248
  15. Unterlauft JD, Schädle N, Kasper K, Klink T, Geerling G. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry in keratoconus. Cornea. 2011;30(10):1078-1082. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0b013e31820cd3d6
  16. Read SA, Collins MJ. Intraocular pressure in keratoconus. Acta Ophthalmol. 2011;89(4):358-364.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-3768.2009.01690.x
  17. Avetisov SE, Bubnova IA, Petrov SYu, Antonov AA. Corneal resistance factor in interretation of tonometry results. Russian Journal of Glaucoma=Natsional’nyj zhurnal glaucoma. 2012;11(1):12-15 (In Russ.).
  18. Bubnova IA, Antonov AA, Novikov IA, Suhanova EV, Petrov SYu, Avetisov KS. Comparison of different IOP parameters in patients with altered biomechanical properties of the cornea. Russian Journal of Glaucoma=Natsional’nyj zhurnal glaucoma. 2011;10(1):10-14 (In Russ.).
  19. Zhao Y, Shen Y, Yan Z, Tian M, Zhao J, Zhou X. Relationship Among Corneal Stiffness, Thickness, and Biomechanical Parameters Measured by Corvis ST, Pentacam and ORA in Keratoconus. Front Physiol. 2019;10:740. eCollection 2019. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2019.00740
  20. Ortiz D, Piñero D, Shabayek MH, Arnalich-Montiel F, Alió JL. Corneal biomechanical properties in normal, post-laser in situ keratomileusis, and keratoconic eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007;33(8):1371-1375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.04.021
  21. Mollan SP, Wolffsohn JS, Nessim M, Laiquzzaman M, Sivakumar S, Hartley S, Shah S. Accuracy of Goldmann, ocular response analyser, Pascal and TonoPen XL tonometry in keratoconic and normal eyes. Br J Ophthalmol. 2008;92(12):1661-1665. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2007.136473
  22. Özcura F, Yildirim N, Tambova E, Şahin A. Evaluation of Goldmann applanation tonometry, rebound tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in keratoconus. J Optom. 2017;10(2):117-122.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2016.04.005
  23. Bayer A, Sahin A, Hürmeriç V, Ozge G. Intraocular pressure values obtained by ocular response analyzer, dynamic contour tonometry, and goldmann tonometry in keratokonic corneas. J Glaucoma. 2010;19(8):540-545.  https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181ca7aeb
  24. Yildiz MB, Kose AO, Celik G, Kizilay O, Imamoglu S, Yildiz E. Agreement among Goldmann Applanation Tonometer, Easyton Transpalpebral Tonometer, Tonopen, and Icare in Patients with Keratoconus. Beyoglu Eye J. 2023; 8(3):170-176.  https://doi.org/10.14744/bej.2023.56933
  25. Knauf D, Seitz B, Schießl G, Zemova E, Flockerzi E. Analysis of Various Modalities for Intraocular Pressure Measurement in Relation to Keratoconus Severity in 246 Eyes of the Homburg Keratoconus Center. Cornea. 2023; 42(7):829-836.  https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0000000000003170
  26. Bilgeç MD, Atalay E, Sözer Ö, Gürsoy H, Bilgin M, Yıldırım N. The influence of corneal geometrical and biomechanical properties on tonometry readings in keratoconic eyes. Int Ophthalmol. 2020;40(4):849-857.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-019-01248-9
  27. Alipour F, Hassanpoor N, Letafatnejad M, Beheshtnejad AH, Mohammadi SF. Tonometry by Ocular Response Analyzer in Keratoconic and Warpage Eyes in Comparison with Normal Eyes. J Curr Ophthalmol. 2021;33(2):118-123.  https://doi.org/10.4103/JOCO.JOCO_147_20
Contact the author
Email
Message
The publishing house "Media Sphere" does not provide treatment services, does not give recommendations on contacting medical institutions and specific specialists, on the prescription of medicines and dietary supplements.

Email Confirmation

An email was sent to test@gmail.com with a confirmation link. Follow the link from the letter to complete the registration on the site.

Email Confirmation

Submit Application

You can become an author of one of our magazines, send a request and we will consider it in during the day.

Name
Phone
E-mail
Message
Login
Registration
E-mail
Password
Forgot Password?

Log in to the site using your account in one of the services

Password recovery
E-mail
Login
Register

We use cооkies to improve the performance of the site. By staying on our site, you agree to the terms of use of cооkies. To view our Privacy and Cookie Policy, please. click here.