Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Using CorvisST tonometry to assess glaucoma progression

  • Masato Matsuura,

    Affiliation Department of Ophthalmology, University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

    ⨯
  • Kazunori Hirasawa,

    Affiliations Department of Ophthalmology, University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan, Orthoptics and Visual Science, Department of Rehabilitation, School of Allied Health Sciences, Kitasato University, Kanagawa, Japan

    ⨯
  • Hiroshi Murata,

    Affiliation Department of Ophthalmology, University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

    ⨯
  • Shunsuke Nakakura,

    Affiliation Department of Ophthalmology, Saneikai Tsukazaki Hospital, Himeji, Japan

    ⨯
  • Yoshiaki Kiuchi,

    Affiliation Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan

    ⨯
  • Ryo Asaoka

    rasaoka-tky@umin.ac.jp

    Affiliation Department of Ophthalmology, University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

    ⨯

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the utility of the Corneal Visualization Scheimpflug Technology instrument (CST) to assess the progression of visual field (VF) damage in primary open angle glaucoma patients.

Method

A total of 75 eyes from 111 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma were investigated. All patients underwent at least nine VF measurements with the Humphrey Field Analyzer, CST measurements, axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT) and intraocular pressure (IOP) with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT). Mean total deviation (mTD) progression rates of the eight VFs, excluding the first VF, were calculated and the association between progression rate and the other listed measurements was analyzed using linear regression, and the optimal to describe mTD progression rate was selected based on the second order bias corrected Akaike Information Criterion (AICc) index.

Results

VF progression was described best in a model that included CST parameters as well as other ocular measurements. The optimal linear model to describe mTD progression rate was given by the equation: -8.9–0.068 x mean GAT + 0.68 x A1 time + 0.31 x A2 time -0.39 x A2 length– 1.26 x highest deformation amplitude.

Conclusion

CST measurements are useful when assessing VF progression in glaucoma patients. In particular, careful consideration should be given to patients where: (i) an eye is observed to be applanated fast in the first and second applanations, (ii) the applanated area is wide in the second applanation and (iii) the indentation is deep at the maximum deformation, since these eyes appear to be at greater risk of VF progression.

Citation: Matsuura M, Hirasawa K, Murata H, Nakakura S, Kiuchi Y, Asaoka R (2017) Using CorvisST tonometry to assess glaucoma progression. PLoS ONE 12(5): e0176380. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176380

Editor: Monica M. Jablonski, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, UNITED STATES

Received: September 17, 2016; Accepted: April 10, 2017; Published: May 4, 2017

Copyright: © 2017 Matsuura et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: The minimal underlying data set necessary for replication of this study is available within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding: All the funding supported this work are Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) -CREST and Grant 26462679 from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan. There was no additional external funding received for this study.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Glaucoma is the leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide with approximately 60 million people suffering from the disease[1]. In glaucoma, intraocular pressure (IOP) should be adequately controlled to avoid visual field (VF) deterioration.[2–10] Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) is widely considered the gold standard method to measure IOP in glaucoma patients. However, a limitation of GAT is that its measurements are influenced by corneal properties, including central corneal thickness (CCT).[11–23] Furthermore, several studies have suggested that the progression of glaucoma is related to the magnitude of CCT itself,[4,24] although more recent studies[25] have revealed that other corneal measurements, namely corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF), measured with the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA, Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Depew, NY, USA), are more closely related to the progression of glaucoma. Thus, it is clear that the biomechanical properties of the cornea are a risk factor for the progression of glaucomatous neuropathy. Corneal biomechanics can now be captured using the Corneal Visualization Scheimpflug Technology instrument (Corvis ST tonometry: CST; Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany). In CST, the corneal movement during the application of a rapid air-puff is captured using an ultra-high-speed Scheimpflug camera. The biomechanical properties of the cornea can then be assessed both visually and quantitatively.[26] However, to date, the relationship between CST parameters and glaucomatous VF progression has not been investigated in detail. Therefore, the purpose of the current study is to investigate the importance of CST parameters on VF deterioration in patients with primary open angle glaucoma (POAG).

Method

The study was approved by Research Ethics Committee of the Graduated School of Medicine and Faculty of Medicine at The University of Tokyo and Hiroshima University Hospital (Hiroshima, Japan). Written consent was given by patients for their information to be stored in the hospital database and used for research. This study was performed according to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Subjects

A total of 111 eyes from 75 POAG patients (39 males and 36 females) were included in this study. All patients had at least nine VF tests with the Humphrey Field Analyzer II (HFA, Carl Zeiss Meditec Inc, Dublin, CA), with 24–2 or 30–2 and SITA standard programme. Reliable VFs were defined as Fixation loss (FL) rate <20% and also False positive (FP) rate <15% following the criteria used in the HFA software. The first VF measurement was discarded to mitigate the learning effect. Consequently, eight VFs were used to measure the rate of progression; this number was specifically chosen as we have recently reported that a precise assessment of VF progression can be achieved using VFs with this volume.[27–31]

Patients with abnormal eye-related findings (except for OAG) on biomicroscopy, gonioscopy and funduscopy were excluded. In addition, eyes that experienced any ocular surgery, including trabeculectomy and cataract surgery were also carefully excluded. Only subjects aged 20 years or older were included and eyes with IOP>25 mmHg or contact lens wearers were excluded. Both eyes of a patient were included in the study, if they were both eligible.

Corvis ST tonometer measurements

CST was performed within 180 days after the final VF measurement. CST (software version; 1.2r1092) measurements were repeated three times and all measurements had sufficient reliability, as indicated by the “OK” quality index displayed on the monitor. Patients were given at least one minute interval to rest between each measurement.

As described in detail elsewhere,[26] CST captures a sequence of images (4330 images per second) of corneal deformation, and various parameters of deformation amplitude, applanation length and corneal velocity are quantified.‘A1/A2 time’ measurements capture the time from the initiation of the air puff to the first (inward corneal movement) or second applanation (outward corneal movement); ‘A1/2 length’ is the length of the applanated flat cornea surface at the first / second applanation; ‘A1/2 velocity’ is the velocity of corneal apex movement during the first / second applanation; ‘A1/2 deformation amplitude’ is the magnitude of the movement of the corneal apex at the first / second applanation; ‘peak distance’ is the distance between the two surrounding peaks on the cornea at the highest concavity; ‘highest deformation amplitude' is the magnitude of the movement of the corneal apex at the highest concavity: ‘highest concavity time’ is the duration from the initiation of the air puff to the highest concavity of the deformation of cornea: ‘radius’ is the central curvature radius at the highest concavity.

Other measurements

CCT was measured using CST three times and the average was used in subsequent analyses. The mean and standard deviation (SD) of GAT during the follow up period were calculated. Axial length (AL) was measured using the IOL Master (Carl Zeiss Meditec).

VF data

The mean total deviation (mTD) was calculated from the 52 test points in the 24–2 HFA VF. The progression rate of mTD, across the eight VFs, was then calculated using linear regression against time.

Statistical analysis

The relationship between ocular/systemic parameters (age, mean GAT, SD of GAT, CCT, AL, and mTD in the initial VF), CST parameters (A 1/2 time, A 1/2 length, A 1/2 velocity, A 1/2 deformation amplitude, highest deformation amplitude, highest concavity time, peak distance, and radius) and mTD progression rate was investigated using linear mixed modelling. In the linear mixed model, a patient is included as a random effect so that both eyes of a patient are appropriately included.

First a linear mixed model was built using only the six ocular/systemic parameters (‘ModelA’) and the optimal to describe mTD progression rate was selected based on the second order bias corrected Akaike Information Criterion (AICc) index. Next, a second model was built using ocular/systemic parameters as well as CST measurements (‘ModelB’). In a linear regression model, the degrees of freedom decreases as the number of variables increases, hence model selection methods should be used when the number of variables is large.[32,33] The AICc (the corrected form of the AIC) was used since this gives an accurate estimation even when the sample size is small.[34]

Any reduction in AICc suggests an improved model, but the probability that one particular model is the model that minimizes ‘information loss’ is calculated as follows. When there are n candidate models and the AICc values of those models are AICc1, AICc2, AICc3, …, AICcn. Let AICcmin be the minimum of those values, exp((AICcmin − AICci)/2) is the relative probability that the ith model minimizes information loss.[35] All statistical analysis were performed using the statistical programming language ‘R’ (R version 3.2.3;The foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria)

Results

Characteristics of the study subjects are summarized in Table 1. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) [range] age was 63.3±9.7 [43 to 85] and 39 patients were male and 36 patients were female. Eight VFs were measured over an average of 2364.0±872.8 [630 to 6881] days. GAT was measured 27.9±8.4 [8 to 69] times during the follow up period (between initial VF and eighth VF). The mean GAT during the follow up period was 13.4±2.2 [8.9 to 20.2] mmHg with an SD value of 1.6±0.5 [0.8 to 3.6]. The mTD progression rate was -0.28±0.4[2.7 to 1.4] dB/year. A summary of CST measurements are shown in Table 2. Among 111 eyes of 75 patients, 65 eyes of 44 patients used prostaglandin analogues throughout the observation period and 31 eyes of 22 patients used prostaglandin analogues at least once in the observation period.

thumbnail
Download:
Table 1. Subject demographics.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176380.t001

thumbnail
Download:
Table 2. Measured CST parameters.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176380.t002

The equation of ModelA was: mTD progression rate = 0.25–0.0085 * age (AICc = 155.6); thus mean GAT, SD of GAT, CCT, AL and mTD in the initial VF were not selected as predictors. The AICc values with each CST parameter are shown in Table 3. A decrease in AICc was observed with all CST parameters compared to ModelA.

thumbnail
Download:
Table 3. Correlation between CST parameters and visual field progression rate.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176380.t003

The equation for ModelB was: mTD progression rate = -8.9–0.068 x mean GAT + 0.68 x A1 time + 0.31 x A2 time -0.39 x A2 length– 1.26 x highest deformation amplitude (AICc = 137.3). The probability that ModelB is optimal (minimizes information loss) compared to ModelA was 99.99%.

Discussion

In the current study CST measurements were carried out in 111 eyes of 75 patients with POAG. VF progression was measured over a period spanning approximately 7 years. Notably, VF progression could be modelled more accurately by including CST parameters in a linear model. This optimal model also included mean GAT during the follow up (higher IOP indicates faster progression), A1 time (shorter time indicates faster progression), A2 time (shorter times suggests faster progression), A2 length (longer length implies faster progression), highest deformation amplitude (higher amplitude signifies faster progression).

The first model, ModelA, (the optimal model without CST parameters) did not include mean GAT, despite many previous studies, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), [3,36–39] that have suggested IOP is a very important factor for managing the progression of glaucoma. The lack of mean GAT in the model is probably because the current study analyzed data obtained from a real world clinic where the management of IOP is decided by clinicians according to the progression of glaucoma. As a result, the direct, at least, effect of IOP on glaucoma progression may be masked, which was also the case in our very recent multi-central study.[40] In a recent paper we found that SD of IOP was related to the progression of glaucoma,[40] but in the current study only age was selected among the basic ocular/systemic factors. Age is an important risk factor for the progression of glaucoma[4,41–43] even in our recent study based on a real world clinical dataset.[40] Interestingly, however, age was no longer included in ModelB (the optimal model that included CST parameters), but a number of CST parameters were included: A1 time, A2 time, A2 length and highest deformation amplitude. As shown in our previous report,[44] age is correlated with shorter A1 time, shorter A2 time, and also deeper highest deformation amplitude. The values of the coefficients of these parameters observed in ModelB follow the pattern of aging, which may suggest that glaucomatous VF progression is more accurately described by changes in corneal biomechanics using CST parameters associated with age rather than using age directly. This is clinically very important because an eye exhibiting these properties has a higher risk of progression, regardless of the patient’s age.

Many previous studies have demonstrated that thin CCT is a risk factor for the progression of glaucoma[4,11,13,24,45,46], however, CCT was not included in ModelA, nor was it included in ModelB. It has recently been suggested that the viscoelastic property of the cornea (corneal hysteresis) is a stronger risk factor for the progression of glaucoma than CCT.[47] In the current study, CST parameters which also measure biomechanical properties of the cornea were selected in ModelB, and this model was significantly superior to ModelA to describe VF progression (the probability that modelA is superior to ModelB was just 6%). CST parameters capture detailed biomechanical properties and thus may better describe the progression of glaucoma than other simpler properties such as CCT.

The stage of VF damage may[4,41,48] or may not[42,49,50] be related to faster VF progression. In the current study, mTD in the initial VF was not included in either model, however, the study population consisted of patients with a relatively early stage of glaucoma (mean mTD = -6.2 dB) so different results could be observed in eyes with more advanced glaucoma. A future study should be carried out to investigate the effect of initial VF damage, and the relationship with CST parameters, in eyes with advanced stage glaucoma.

As suggested by ModelB eyes that are quickly applanated at the first and second applanations (short A1 and A2 time) were more likely to show fast progression. Fig 1 shows the air–pulse pressure and infrared signal reflected from the corneal surface at A1 and A2 times. The infrared signal reflected from the corneal surface in an eye with short A1 and A2 time (an eye more likely to exhibit fast VF progression) shifts to the left; see red and blue lines in Fig 1. In such an eye, the corneal top would start moving backwards while the applied air pulse energy is less accumulated, which would result in it returning to its initial shape more quickly. This suggests that a cornea that is easily deformed is more likely to progress, and thus the biomechanical properties of such an eye may be different to those of a stable eye. The hysteresis of a viscoelastic material is defined as the amount of energy absorption in the ‘loading/unloading’ stress/strain cycle and the magnitude of the energy absorption can be calculated as the area surrounded by the loading and unloading curves.[51] In glaucoma, it has been reported that corneal hysteresis reflects reduced compliance of the lamina cribrosa and thus it may provide further information about glaucoma risk.[52,53] The reason why eyes with low corneal hysteresis are at greater risk for the advancement of glaucoma is not entirely clear, but it may be because these eyes are exposed to greater changes of magnitude in IOP in their daily life (such as postural change,[54] eye lid blinking,[55] ocular pulsatility due to ocular hemodynamics,[56] Valsalva maneuver[57]). It is also possible that an eye with high hysteresis is more likely to absorb these external strains, which would be advantageous to prevent retinal nerve fiber damage at the optic nerve and also retinal ganglion cell loss. A similar hypothesis could be argued regarding strain at the optic disc due to eye movements.[58]

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 1. Air–pulse pressure and infrared signal reflected from the corneal surface at A1 and A2 times.

The infrared signal reflected from the corneal surface in an eye with fast A1 and A2 time shifts to left side (please see the comparison of the red and blue lines).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176380.g001

The mechanism to measure A1 time in CST is very similar to that in air-puff tonometers; the time to applanation is measured following an air-puff injection where force increases with time,[59] although the movement of cornea is captured using the reflection of an installed infrared light in air-puff tonometry whereas CST detects the movement of the cornea using the captured images. Thus, A1 time takes on a lower value in an eye with a lower IOP. IOP is an established risk factor of the progression of glaucoma and indeed this study showed that high mean IOP-GAT is related to fast visual field progression. Importantly ‘true’ IOP cannot be measured with any current tonometers; further, it has been reported that IOP readings from air-puff tonometry are greatly decreased in eyes with thin CCT.[21] Thin CCT has been reported to be a risk factor for the progression of glaucoma[4,24] so it would be of interest to investigate whether it remains a risk factor in eyes whose CST-measured IOP readings are lower than in other tonometers less influenced by CCT, such as dynamic contour tonometry.[45]

Eyes experiencing a deep indentation of the cornea with the CST air-puff and eyes with a longer A2 length were at greater risk of fast progression. As CST applies the air pressure with an uniform magnitude to the corneal surface in all measurements, a large highest concavity deformation amplitude value suggests an eye that is easily deformed (fragile). Further, a wide applanated diameter at the second applanation (A2 length) would therefore be associated with a deep highest concavity deformation amplitude. Previous studies have investigated the relationship between some CST parameters and glaucoma. Jung et al. investigated the relationship between highest deformation amplitude and β-zone parapapillary atrophy (βPPA) and reported that a large highest deformation amplitude was associated with a large PPA area.[60] Other studies have compared CST parameters between normal and glaucomatous eyes in a cross-sectional manner, suggesting highest concavity deformation amplitude is lower in glaucoma patients than in normal subjects.[61,62] To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first to investigate the progression rate of glaucoma and CST parameters using a longitudinal dataset. Furthermore, in the previous studies,[60,61,63] the relationship between corneal deformation amplitude and glaucoma was investigated using a univariate analysis. Higher IOP is associated with the progression of glaucoma, but high IOP is also associated with decreased corneal deformation amplitude due to the resistance effect induced by increased pressure. Indeed, in the current population, low corneal deformation amplitude was significantly related to high IOP (p < 0.001, linear mixed model, data not shown in Results). This strongly implies that the relationship between low corneal deformation amplitude and glaucoma in these previous studies may by biased by the indirect effect of high IOP on low corneal deformation amplitude. In the current study, the influence of corneal deformation amplitude was investigated adjusting for IOP level (multivariable linear mixed model: ModelB); our results suggest that higher corneal deformation amplitude is related to the progression of glaucoma. However, in the current study, higher corneal deformation amplitude was related to progression in the univariate analysis also (Table 3). The reason for this is not entirely clear, but it could be because our study was carried out in carefully treated glaucoma patients in a real world clinic, and hence the effect of IOP on progression of glaucoma was almost negligible, as shown in our recent report.[40] A limitation of the current study is the lack of a ‘control arm’ of healthy subjects. The effect of CST parameters, considering the importance of IOP in a multivariate analysis, should be investigated in a longitudinal dataset from normal subjects in a future study. A further limitation of the current study is that the effect of anti-glaucomatous eye drops, which are known to change the biomechanical properties of the cornea, could not be controlled for.[63–66] As the patients in the current study were recruited from a real world glaucoma clinic, most patients would be taking eye drops to control their IOP. Thus, a future study should be designed to exclude the effect of the use of anti-glaucomatous eye drops. The studied patients in the current study were treated not basing on the CST parameter values. Different or even reversed findings could be observed when clinicians treat patients considering their CST information.

In conclusion, it appears useful to carry out CST when assessing the progression of glaucomatous VF damage. Careful management is needed in eyes with short A1 time, short A2 time, long A2 length and a large highest deformation amplitude.

Supporting information

S1 File. Data analyzed.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176380.s001

(CSV)

Author Contributions

  1. Conceptualization: HM YK RA.
  2. Data curation: MM KH HM SN YK RA.
  3. Formal analysis: HM RA.
  4. Funding acquisition: RA.
  5. Investigation: MM KH HM SN YK RA.
  6. Methodology: HM YK RA.
  7. Project administration: MM KH HM SN YK RA.
  8. Resources: MM KH HM SN YK RA.
  9. Software: HM RA.
  10. Supervision: YK RA.
  11. Validation: MM KH HM SN YK RA.
  12. Visualization: MM KH HM SN YK RA.
  13. Writing – original draft: MM RA.
  14. Writing – review & editing: MM KH HM SN YK RA.

References

  1. 1. Quigley HA (2011) Glaucoma. Lancet 377: 1367–1377. pmid:21453963
  2. 2. Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Bengtsson B, Hussein M (2002) Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol 120: 1268–1279. pmid:12365904
  3. 3. Garway-Heath DF, Crabb DP, Bunce C, Lascaratos G, Amalfitano F, Anand N, et al. (2015) Latanoprost for open-angle glaucoma (UKGTS): a randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 385: 1295–1304. pmid:25533656
  4. 4. Leske MC, Heijl A, Hyman L, Bengtsson B, Dong L, Yang Z (2007) Predictors of long-term progression in the early manifest glaucoma trial. Ophthalmology 114: 1965–1972. pmid:17628686
  5. 5. Holmin C, Thorburn W, Krakau CE (1988) Treatment versus no treatment in chronic open angle glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 66: 170–173.
  6. 6. Pajic B, Pajic-Eggspuehler B, Hafliger IO (2010) Comparison of the effects of dorzolamide/timolol and latanoprost/timolol fixed combinations upon intraocular pressure and progression of visual field damage in primary open-angle glaucoma. Curr Med Res Opin 26: 2213–2219. pmid:20673200
  7. 7. Migdal C, Gregory W, Hitchings R (1994) Long-term functional outcome after early surgery compared with laser and medicine in open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmology 101: 1651–1656; discussion 1657. pmid:7936562
  8. 8. Jay JL, Murray SB (1988) Early trabeculectomy versus conventional management in primary open angle glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 72: 881–889. pmid:3067743
  9. 9. Musch DC, Gillespie BW, Lichter PR, Niziol LM, Janz NK, Investigators CS (2009) Visual field progression in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study the impact of treatment and other baseline factors. Ophthalmology 116: 200–207. pmid:19019444
  10. 10. (2000) The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 7. The relationship between control of intraocular pressure and visual field deterioration.The AGIS Investigators. Am J Ophthalmol 130: 429–440. pmid:11024415
  11. 11. Whitacre MM, Stein R (1993) Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers. Surv Ophthalmol 38: 1–30. pmid:8235993
  12. 12. Kotecha A, Elsheikh A, Roberts CR, Zhu H, Garway-Heath DF (2006) Corneal thickness- and age-related biomechanical properties of the cornea measured with the ocular response analyzer. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47: 5337–5347. pmid:17122122
  13. 13. Feltgen N, Leifert D, Funk J (2001) Correlation between central corneal thickness, applanation tonometry, and direct intracameral IOP readings. Br J Ophthalmol 85: 85–87. pmid:11133718
  14. 14. Ehlers N, Bramsen T (1975) Importance of corneal thickness in applanation tonometry [proceedings]. Acta Ophthalmol Suppl: 32. pmid:184659
  15. 15. Bhan A, Browning AC, Shah S, Hamilton R, Dave D, Dua HS (2002) Effect of corneal thickness on intraocular pressure measurements with the pneumotonometer, Goldmann applanation tonometer, and Tono-Pen. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 43: 1389–1392. pmid:11980851
  16. 16. Foster PJ, Baasanhu J, Alsbirk PH, Munkhbayar D, Uranchimeg D, Johnson GJ (1998) Central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure in a Mongolian population. Ophthalmology 105: 969–973. pmid:9627643
  17. 17. Gunvant P, Baskaran M, Vijaya L, Joseph IS, Watkins RJ, Nallapothula M, et al. (2004) Effect of corneal parameters on measurements using the pulsatile ocular blood flow tonograph and Goldmann applanation tonometer. Br J Ophthalmol 88: 518–522. pmid:15031169
  18. 18. Shah S, Chatterjee A, Mathai M, Kelly SP, Kwartz J, Henson D, et al. (1999) Relationship between corneal thickness and measured intraocular pressure in a general ophthalmology clinic. Ophthalmology 106: 2154–2160. pmid:10571352
  19. 19. Shimmyo M, Ross AJ, Moy A, Mostafavi R (2003) Intraocular pressure, Goldmann applanation tension, corneal thickness, and corneal curvature in Caucasians, Asians, Hispanics, and African Americans. Am J Ophthalmol 136: 603–613. pmid:14516799
  20. 20. Stodtmeister R (1998) Applanation tonometry and correction according to corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 76: 319–324. pmid:9686845
  21. 21. Tonnu PA, Ho T, Newson T, El Sheikh A, Sharma K, White E, et al. (2005) The influence of central corneal thickness and age on intraocular pressure measured by pneumotonometry, non-contact tonometry, the Tono-Pen XL, and Goldmann applanation tonometry. Br J Ophthalmol 89: 851–854. pmid:15965165
  22. 22. Wolfs RC, Klaver CC, Vingerling JR, Grobbee DE, Hofman A, de Jong PT (1997) Distribution of central corneal thickness and its association with intraocular pressure: The Rotterdam Study. Am J Ophthalmol 123: 767–772. pmid:9535620
  23. 23. Liu J, Roberts CJ (2005) Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurement: quantitative analysis. J Cataract Refract Surg 31: 146–155. pmid:15721707
  24. 24. Jonas JB, Holbach L (2005) Central corneal thickness and thickness of the lamina cribrosa in human eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 46: 1275–1279. pmid:15790890
  25. 25. Medeiros FA, Meira-Freitas D, Lisboa R, Kuang TM, Zangwill LM, Weinreb RN (2013) Corneal hysteresis as a risk factor for glaucoma progression: a prospective longitudinal study. Ophthalmology 120: 1533–1540. pmid:23642371
  26. 26. Koprowski R (2014) Automatic method of analysis and measurement of additional parameters of corneal deformation in the Corvis tonometer. Biomed Eng Online 13: 150. pmid:25406740
  27. 27. Taketani Y, Murata H, Fujino Y, Mayama C, Asaoka R (2015) How Many Visual Fields Are Required to Precisely Predict Future Test Results in Glaucoma Patients When Using Different Trend Analyses? Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 56: 4076–4082. pmid:26114484
  28. 28. Krakau CE (1985) A statistical trap in the evaluation of visual field decay. Acta Ophthalmol Suppl 173: 19–21. pmid:3002093
  29. 29. Spry PG, Bates AB, Johnson CA, Chauhan BC (2000) Simulation of longitudinal threshold visual field data. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 41: 2192–2200. pmid:10892862
  30. 30. Bengtsson B, Patella VM, Heijl A (2009) Prediction of glaucomatous visual field loss by extrapolation of linear trends. Arch Ophthalmol 127: 1610–1615. pmid:20008716
  31. 31. Holmin C, Krakau CE (1982) Regression analysis of the central visual field in chronic glaucoma cases. A follow-up study using automatic perimetry. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 60: 267–274.
  32. 32. Tibshirani RJ, Taylor J (2012) Degrees of freedom in lasso problems. Annals of Statistics 40: 1198–1232.
  33. 33. Mallows C (1973) Some comments on Cp. Technometrics 15: 661–675.
  34. 34. Burnham KP, (2004) Multimodel inference: understanding: AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociological Methods & Research 33: 261–304.
  35. 35. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach (2nd ed.). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
    • 36. (1998) The effectiveness of intraocular pressure reduction in the treatment of normal-tension glaucoma. Collaborative Normal-Tension Glaucoma Study Group. Am J Ophthalmol 126: 498–505. pmid:9780094
    • 37. Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Bengtsson B, Hussein M, et al. (2002) Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol 120: 1268–1279. pmid:12365904
    • 38. Kass MA, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, Johnson CA, Keltner JL, Miller JP, et al. (2002) The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: a randomized trial determines that topical ocular hypotensive medication delays or prevents the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 120: 701–713; discussion 829–730. pmid:12049574
    • 39. Ederer F, Gaasterland DE, Sullivan EK, Investigators A (1994) The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 1. Study design and methods and baseline characteristics of study patients. Control Clin Trials 15: 299–325. pmid:7956270
    • 40. Fujino Y, Asaoka R, Murata H, Miki A, Tanito M, Mizoue S, et al. (in press) Evaluation of glaucoma progression in large-scale clinical data: the Japanese Archive of Multicentral Databases in Glaucoma (JAMDIG). Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci.
    • 41. Lichter PR, Musch DC, Gillespie BW, Guire KE, Janz NK, Wren PA, et al. (2001) Interim clinical outcomes in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study comparing initial treatment randomized to medications or surgery. Ophthalmology 108: 1943–1953. pmid:11713061
    • 42. Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, Johnson CA, et al. (2002) The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 120: 714–720; discussion 829–730. pmid:12049575
    • 43. De Moraes CG, Liebmann JM, Greenfield DS, Gardiner SK, Ritch R, Krupin T (2012) Risk factors for visual field progression in the low-pressure glaucoma treatment study. Am J Ophthalmol 154: 702–711. pmid:22835512
    • 44. Asaoka R, Nakakura S, Tabuchi H, Murata H, Nakao Y, Ihara N, et al. (2015) The Relationship between Corvis ST Tonometry Measured Corneal Parameters and Intraocular Pressure, Corneal Thickness and Corneal Curvature. PLoS One 10: e0140385. pmid:26485129
    • 45. Kotecha A, White ET, Shewry JM, Garway-Heath DF (2005) The relative effects of corneal thickness and age on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry. Br J Ophthalmol 89: 1572–1575. pmid:16299132
    • 46. Whitacre MM, Stein RA, Hassanein K (1993) The effect of corneal thickness on applanation tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol 115: 592–596. pmid:8488910
    • 47. Lascaratos G, Garway-Heath DF, Russell RA, Crabb DP, Zhu H, Hirn C, et al. Intraocular pressure (IOP) measured with the Ocular Response Analyzer is a better predictor of glaucoma progression than Goldmann IOP in the United Kingdom Glaucoma TreatmentStudy (UKGTS).; 2014.
      • 48. Lee JM, Caprioli J, Nouri-Mahdavi K, Afifi AA, Morales E, Ramanathan M, et al. (2014) Baseline prognostic factors predict rapid visual field deterioration in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 55: 2228–2236. pmid:24458154
      • 49. Gordon MO, Torri V, Miglior S, Beiser JA, Floriani I, Miller JP, et al. (2007) Validated prediction model for the development of primary open-angle glaucoma in individuals with ocular hypertension. Ophthalmology 114: 10–19. pmid:17095090
      • 50. Medeiros FA, Weinreb RN, Sample PA, Gomi CF, Bowd C, Crowston JG, et al. (2005) Validation of a predictive model to estimate the risk of conversion from ocular hypertension to glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 123: 1351–1360. pmid:16219726
      • 51. Ewing JA (1889) On hysteresis in the relation of strain to stress. British Association Reports: 502–504.
        • 52. Wells AP, Garway-Heath DF, Poostchi A, Wong T, Chan KC, Sachdev N (2008) Corneal hysteresis but not corneal thickness correlates with optic nerve surface compliance in glaucoma patients. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 49: 3262–3268. pmid:18316697
        • 53. Lesk MR, Hafez AS, Descovich D (2006) Relationship between central corneal thickness and changes of optic nerve head topography and blood flow after intraocular pressure reduction in open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Arch Ophthalmol 124: 1568–1572. pmid:17102003
        • 54. Wang YX, Jiang R, Wang NL, Xu L, Jonas JB (2015) Acute Peripapillary Retinal Pigment Epithelium Changes Associated with Acute Intraocular Pressure Elevation. Ophthalmology 122: 2022–2028. pmid:26189187
        • 55. Ritch R (1996) A unification hypothesis of pigment dispersion syndrome. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 94: 381–405; discussion 405–389. pmid:8981706
        • 56. Singh K, Dion C, Wajszilber M, Ozaki T, Lesk MR, Costantino S (2011) Measurement of ocular fundus pulsation in healthy subjects using a novel Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 52: 8927–8932. pmid:21969303
        • 57. Kim YW, Girard MJ, Mari JM, Jeoung JW (2016) Anterior Displacement of Lamina Cribrosa during Valsalva Maneuver in Young Healthy Eyes. PLoS One 11: e0159663. pmid:27442120
        • 58. Wang X, Rumpel H, Lim WE, Baskaran M, Perera SA, Nongpiur ME, et al. (2016) Finite Element Analysis Predicts Large Optic Nerve Head Strains During Horizontal Eye Movements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 57: 2452–2462. pmid:27149695
        • 59. Forbes M, Pico G Jr., Grolman B (1974) A noncontact applanation tonometer. Description and clinical evaluation. Arch Ophthalmol 91: 134–140. pmid:4810646
        • 60. Jung Y, Park HY, Park CK (2016) Association between Corneal Deformation Amplitude and Posterior Pole Profiles in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma. Ophthalmology 123: 959–964. pmid:26875001
        • 61. Salvetat ML, Zeppieri M, Tosoni C, Felletti M, Grasso L, Brusini P (2015) Corneal Deformation Parameters Provided by the Corvis-ST Pachy-Tonometer in Healthy Subjects and Glaucoma Patients. J Glaucoma 24: 568–574. pmid:25318572
        • 62. Wang W, Du S, Zhang X (2015) Corneal Deformation Response in Patients With Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma and in Healthy Subjects Analyzed by Corvis ST. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 56: 5557–5565. pmid:26305527
        • 63. Zhong Y, Shen X, Yu J, Tan H, Cheng Y (2011) The comparison of the effects of latanoprost, travoprost, and bimatoprost on central corneal thickness. Cornea 30: 861–864. pmid:21499083
        • 64. Nielsen CB, Nielsen PJ (1985) Effect of alpha- and beta-receptor active drugs on corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 63: 351–354.
        • 65. Inoue K, Okugawa K, Oshika T, Amano S (2003) Influence of dorzolamide on corneal endothelium. Jpn J Ophthalmol 47: 129–133. pmid:12738544
        • 66. Kaminski S, Hommer A, Koyuncu D, Biowski R, Barisani T, Baumgartner I (1998) Influence of dorzolamide on corneal thickness, endothelial cell count and corneal sensibility. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 76: 78–79. pmid:9541439