Comparison between the rebound (TD - 8000 portable) and applanation tonometer (Tono-Pen Avia™) managed by different evaluators for intraocular pressure measurements in rabbits

Vinícius Thomaz da Silva Almeida; Cristiane  Buzzato Garcia; Adriana Torrecilhas Jorge; Daniel Paulino Júnior; João Guilherme Martins; Poliana Marques Pereira; Silvio de Almeida Júnior; Fernanda Gosuen Gonçalves Dias

doi:10.1590/1809-6891v23e-73055E

Authors

Vinícius Thomaz da Silva Almeida Universidade de Franca (UNIFRAN), Franca, São Paulo, Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4030-5864
Cristiane Buzzato Garcia Universidade de Franca (UNIFRAN), Franca, São Paulo, Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3247-1600
Adriana Torrecilhas Jorge Universidade de Franca (UNIFRAN), Franca, São Paulo, Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8518-1311
Daniel Paulino Júnior Universidade de Franca (UNIFRAN), Franca, São Paulo, Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1375-8369
João Guilherme Martins Universidade de Franca (UNIFRAN), Franca, São Paulo, Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0573-4145
Poliana Marques Pereira Universidade de Franca (UNIFRAN), Franca, São Paulo, Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8657-5072
Silvio de Almeida Júnior Universidade de Franca (UNIFRAN), Franca, São Paulo, Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7949-4941
Fernanda Gosuen Gonçalves Dias Universidade de Franca (UNIFRAN), Franca, São Paulo, Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6072-4789

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-6891v23e-73055E

Abstract

This study aimed to compare values of intraocular pressure (IOP) by different tonometers and evaluators (veterinary ophthalmologist specialist and veterinary not a specialist). For this, 30 rabbits were used, and in all (n = 60 eyes), the IOP was initially measured with a rebound tonometer (model TD - 8000 portable, Apramed Indústria e Comércio de Equipamentos Médicos Ltda) and, subsequently, with an applanation tonometer (portable model Tono-Pen Avia™®, Reichert Technologies®, USA). With the two devices, the measurements in mmHg were performed in the central region of the corneas, always performed in the same period, by a professional veterinary ophthalmologist (specialist) and a professional veterinary (not a specialist). Data were statistically compared using the simple analysis of variance test. With the rebound tonometer, IOP ranged from 7 to 14 mmHg when measured by both evaluators; while with the applanation tonometer, from 9 to 15 mmHg by the specialist and from 8 to 16 mmHg by the non-specialist. In the right eyes, the IOP measured by the applanation tonometer by the non-experienced evaluator was statistically lower than the specialist's values; yet, the results of the two evaluators were higher in these same eyes when compared with those of the rebound tonometer. In the left eyes, the IOP measured by the applanation tonometer by the non-experienced evaluator was statistically higher than the specialist's values with the rebound tonometer. Thus, it was possible to infer that, regardless of experience in the area, the applanation tonometer indicated higher mean values of IOP in both eyes and, about the evaluators, the means of the measurements performed by the specialist were higher compared to the non-professional specialist.
Keywords: aqueous humor; glaucoma; veterinary ophthalmology; tonometry; uveitis

Downloads

References

Broadwater JJ, Schorling J, Herring IP, Elvinger F. Effect of body position on intraocular pressure in dogs without glaucoma. American Journal of Veterinary Research. 2008;69(1):527-530. Available in: https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.69.4.527.

Ghaffari MS, Shojaei M, Sabzevari A, Khoramid N. Reference values for intraocular pressure and Schirmer tear test in clinically normal Sanjabi sheep. Small Ruminant Research. 2011;97(1):101-103. Available in: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.smallrumres.2010.12.008.

Featherstone HJ, Heinrich CL. Ophthalmic examination and diagnostics. In: Gelatt KN, Gilger BC, KERN TJ. Veterinary Ophthalmology. 5th ed. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons; 2013. p. 533-702.

Gum GG, Mackay EO. Physiology of the eye. In: Gelatt KN, Gilger BC, Kern TJ. Veterinary Ophthalmology. 5th ed. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons; 2013. p. 171-207.

Johnson TV, Fan S, Toris CB. Rebound tonometry in conscious, conditioned mice avoids the acute and profound effects of anesthesia on intraocular pressure. Journal of Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics. 2008;24(2):175-185. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1089/jop.2007.0114.

Gelatt KN, Peiffer Junior RLP, Gum GG, Gwin RM, Erickson JL. Evaluation of applanation tonometers for the dog eye. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 1977;16(10):963-968. Available in: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/908649/.

Zhong L, Desai LS. Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements between Tonopen Vet and TonoVet in dutch belted rabbits. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 2009;50(1):2856.

Prashar A, Guggenheim JA, Erichsen JT, Hocking PM, Morgan JE. Mearusement of intraocular pressure (IOP) in chickens using a rebound tonometer: quantitative evaluation of variance due to position inaccuracies. Experimental Eye Research. 2007;85(4):563-571. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exer.2007.07.010.

Kontiola AI, Goldblum D, Mittag T, Danias J. The induction/impact tonometer: a new instrument to measure intraocular pressure in the rat. Experimental Eye Research. 2001;73(6):781-785. Available in: https://doi.org/ 10.1006/EXER.2001.1088 .

Cervino A. Rebound tonometry: new opportunities and limitations of non invasive determination of intraocular pressure. British Journal of Ophthalmology. 2006;90 (12):1444-1446. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2006.102970.

Tofflemire KL, Wang C, Jens JK, Ellinwood NM, Whitley RD, Ben-Shlomo G. Evaluation of three hand-held tonometers in normal canine eyes. The Veterinary Journal. 2017;224 (1):7-10. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2017.04.003.

Pereira FQ, Bercht BS, Soares MG, Mota MGB, Pigatto JAT. Comparison of a rebound and an applanation tonometer for measuring intraocular pressure in normal rabbits. Veterinary Ophthalmology. 2011;14(5):321-326. Available in: https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1463-5224.2011.00879.

Andrade SF, Palozzi RJ, Giuffrida R, Campos RJ, Santos GC, Fukui RM. Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements between the Tono-Pen XL® and Perkins® applanation tonometers in dogs and cats. Veterinary Ophthalmology. 2012;15(1): 14-20. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-5224.2011.00926.x.

Oliveira JK, Montiani-Ferreira F, Williams DL. The influence of the tonometer position on canine intraocular pressure measurements using the Tonovet rebound tonometer. Open Veterinary Journal. 2018;8(1):68-76. Available in: https://doi.org/10.4314/ovj.v8i1.12.

Ofri R. Intraocular pressure and glaucoma. Veterinary Clinics: Exotic Animal Pratice. 2002;5(2):391-406. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1094-9194(01)00004-4.

Gonçalves GF, Pippi NL, Pachaly JR. Pressão intraocular em cães com catarata. Arquivos de Ciências Veterinárias e Zoologia da UNIPAR. 2005;8(1):57-61. Available in: https://revistas.unipar.br/index.php/veterinaria/article/view/68.

Oriá AP, Gomes Júnior DC, Souza MR, Costa Neto JM, Estrela-Lima A, Dórea Neto FA. Glaucoma secundário em cães e gatos. Medicina Veterinária. 2013;7(3):13-22. Available in: http://www.journals.ufrpe.br/index.php/medicinaveterinaria/article/view/588/467.

Samuelson DA. Ophthalmic Anatomy. In: Gelatt KN, Gilger BC, Kern TJ. Veterinary Ophthalmology. 5th ed. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons; 2013. p. 39-170.

Lim KS, Wickremasinghe SS, Cordeiro MF, Bunce C, Khaw PT. Accuracy of intraocular pressure measurements in new zealand white rabbits. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 2005;46 (7):2419-2423. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.04-061.

Workman P, Aboagye, EO, Balkwill F, Balmain A, Bruder G et al. Guidelines for the welfare and use of animals in cancer research. British Journal of Cancer. 2010;102(1):1555-1577. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6605642.

Kern TJ. Rabbit and rodent ophthalmology. Seminars in Avian and Exotic Pet Medicine. 1997;6(3):138-145. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/s1055-937x(97)80021-7.

Ma D, Chen CB, Liang J, Lu Z, Chem H, Zhang M. Repeatability, reproducibility and agreement of intraocular pressure measurement in rabbits by the TonoVet and Tono-Pen. Scientific Reports. 2016;6(35187):1-7. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep35187.

Welihozkiy A, Bedenice D, Price LL, Pizzirani S, Pirie CG. Mensurement of corneal sensitivity in 20 ophthalmologically normal alpacas. Veterinary Ophthalmology. 2011;14(5):333-336. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-5224.2011.00895.x.

Pigatto JAT, Pereira JQ, Alburquerque L, Corrêa LFD, Bercht BS, Hünning OS, Silva AAR, Freitas JVRP. Intraocular pressure meansurement in sheep using an applanation tonometer. Revista Ceres. 2011;58(6):685-689. Available in: https://doi.org/ 10.1590/S0034-737X2011000600002.

Martín-Suárez E, Molleda C, Tardón R, Galán A, Gallardo J, Molleda J. Diurnal variations of central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure in dogs from 8:00 am to 8:00 pm. The Canadian Veterinary Journal. 2014;5 (4):361-365. Available in: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3953936/.

González-Méijome JM, Jorge J, Queirós A, Fernandes P, Montés-Micó R, Almeida JB, Parafita MA. Age differences in central and peripheral intraocular pressure using a rebound tonometer. British Journal of Ophthalmology. 2006(12):1495-1500. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2006.103044.

Queirós A, González-Méijome JM, Fernandes P, Jorge J, Montés-Micó R, Almeida JB, Parafita MA. Technical note: a comparison of central and peripheral intraocular pressure using rebound tonometry. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics. 2007;(5): 506-511. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2007.00508.x.

Yamashita T, Miki A, Leki Y, Kirvu J, Yaoeda K, Shirakashi M. Central and peripheral intraocular pressure measured by a rebound tonometer. Clinical Ophthalmology. 2011;5(1):1113-1118. Available in: https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S23143.

Muttuvelu DV, Baggesen K, Ehlers N. Precision and accuracy of the ICare tonometer - Peripheral and central IOP measurements by rebound tonometry. Acta Ophthalmology. 2012;90(4):322-326. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-3768.2010.01987.x.

Beasley IG, Laughton DS, Coldrick BJ, Drew TE, Sallah M, Davies LN. Does rebound tonometry probe misalignment modify intraocular pressure measurements in human eyes? American Journal of Ophthalmology. 2013;1-6. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/791084.

Zhang H, Yang D, Ross CM, Wigg JP, Pandav S, Crowston JG. Validation of rebound tonometry for intraocular pressure measurement in the rabbit. Experimental Eye Research. 2014;121(1):89. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exer.2014.02.004.

Grandin T. Assesment of stress during handling and transport. Journal of Animal Science. 1997;75(1):249-257. Available in: https://doi.org/10.2527/1997.751249x.

Wang, X.; Dong, J.; Wu, Q. Twenty-four-hour measurement of IOP in rabbits using rebound tonometer. Veterinary Ophthalmology. 2013;16(6):423,425. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1111/vop.12020.

Fernandes P, Díaz-Reis JA, Queiros A, Gonzales-Meijome JM, Jorge J. Comparasion of the ICare rebound tonometer with the Goldmann tonometer in a normal population. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics. 2005;25(5):436-440. Available in: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2005.00327.x

Kniestedt C, Lin S, Choe J, Nee M, Bostrom A, Sturmer J, Stamper RL. Correlation between intraocular pressure, central corneal thickness, stage of glaucoma, and demographic patient data: prospective analysis of biophysical parameters in tertiary glaucoma practice populations. Journal of Glaucoma. 2006;15(1):91-97. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1097/00061198-200604000-00003.

Martinez-De-La-Casa JM, Garcia-Feijoo J, Vico E, Fernandez-Vidal A, Del Castillo JMB, Wasfi M, Garcia-Sanchez, J. Effect of corneal thickness on dynamic contour, rebound, and Goldmann tonometry. Ophthalmology. 2006;113(12):2156-2162. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.06.016.

Ofri R, Horowitz IH, Levison M, Kass PH. Intraocular pressure and tear production in captive eland and fallow deer. Journal of Wildlife Diseases. 2001;37(2):387-390. Available in: https://doi.org/10.7589/0090-3558-37.2.387.

Tofflemire KL, Whitley EM, Gould AS, Dewell RD, Allbaugh RA, Ben-Shlomo G, O'Connor AM, Whitley RD. Schirmer tear test I and rebound tonometry findings in healthy calves. Veterinary Ophthalmology. 2015;18(2):147-151. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1111/vop.12165.

Liu G, Zeng T, Yu W, Yan N, Wang H, Cai SP, Pang LH, Liu H. Characterization of intraocular pressure responses of the Tibetan monkey (Macaca thibetana). Molecular Vision. 2011;17(1):1405-1413. Available in: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21654897/.

Vareilles P, Conquet P, Le Douarec JC. A method for the routine intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement in the rabbit: range of IOP variations in this species. Experimental Eye Research. 1977;24(1):369-375. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1111/vop.1216510.1016/0014-4835(77)90149-X.