Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 412

1.

Intraocular pressure and ocular pulse amplitude comparisons in different types of glaucoma using dynamic contour tonometry.

Punjabi OS, Ho HK, Kniestedt C, Bostrom AG, Stamper RL, Lin SC.

Curr Eye Res. 2006 Oct;31(10):851-62.

PMID:
17050277
2.

Dynamic contour tonometry in primary open angle glaucoma and pseudoexfoliation glaucoma: factors associated with intraocular pressure and ocular pulse amplitude.

Moghimi S, Torabi H, Fakhraie G, Nassiri N, Mohammadi M.

Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2013 Apr-Jun;20(2):158-62. doi: 10.4103/0974-9233.110606.

3.

[Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry, Goldmann and pneumotonometer in ocular hypertension patients and their relationship to pachymetry and ocular pulse amplitude].

Colás-Tomás T, Prieto-Del Cura M, Villafruela-Güemes I, Clariana-Martín A, Valdivia-Pérez A.

Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol. 2012 Dec;87(12):401-6. doi: 10.1016/j.oftal.2012.05.004. Epub 2012 Jul 24. Spanish.

PMID:
23121701
4.

[Dynamic Contour Tonometry and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry: Difference of Intraocular Pressure Values Between Eyes with and without Glaucomatous Damage in Thin Corneas].

Umurhan Akkan JC, Akkan F, Sezgin Akcay BI, Ayintap E, Tuncer K.

Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2015 Oct;232(10):1190-7. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-104772. Epub 2015 Oct 29. German.

PMID:
26512850
5.

[Clinical evaluation of the Pascal dynamic contour tonometer].

Detry-Morel M, Jamart J, Detry MB, Ledoux A, Pourjavan S.

J Fr Ophtalmol. 2007 Mar;30(3):260-70. French.

6.

[Clinical assessment of dynamic contour tonometer].

Shi W, Zhong Y, Dong FT, Xu P, Wang RY.

Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2008 May;44(5):408-12. Chinese.

PMID:
18953894
7.

Comparisons between Pascal dynamic contour tonometry, the TonoPen, and Goldmann applanation tonometry in patients with glaucoma.

Salvetat ML, Zeppieri M, Tosoni C, Brusini P.

Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2007 May;85(3):272-9.

8.

IOP measured by dynamic contour tonometry correlates with IOP measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry and non-contact tonometry in Japanese individuals.

Ito K, Tawara A, Kubota T, Harada Y.

J Glaucoma. 2012 Jan;21(1):35-40. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e31820275b4.

PMID:
21173706
9.

Effects of corneal thickness, corneal curvature, and intraocular pressure level on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry.

Francis BA, Hsieh A, Lai MY, Chopra V, Pena F, Azen S, Varma R; Los Angeles Latino Eye Study Group.

Ophthalmology. 2007 Jan;114(1):20-6. Epub 2006 Oct 27.

PMID:
17070592
10.

Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and goldmann applanation tonometry in African American subjects.

Medeiros FA, Sample PA, Weinreb RN.

Ophthalmology. 2007 Apr;114(4):658-65. Epub 2006 Nov 30.

PMID:
17141320
11.

[Effect of Morphological and Functional Parameters on Ocular Pulse Amplitudes: An Analysis in Ocular Hypertension and Different Types of Glaucoma].

Milioti G, Langenbucher A, Seitz B, Löw U.

Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2017 Feb;234(2):223-230. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-101350. Epub 2016 Apr 30. German.

PMID:
27130975
12.

Relationship between corneal biomechanical properties, central corneal thickness, and intraocular pressure across the spectrum of glaucoma.

Kaushik S, Pandav SS, Banger A, Aggarwal K, Gupta A.

Am J Ophthalmol. 2012 May;153(5):840-849.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2011.10.032. Epub 2012 Feb 4.

PMID:
22310080
13.

Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry in glaucoma practice.

Halkiadakis I, Patsea E, Chatzimichali K, Skouriotis S, Chalkidou S, Amariotakis G, Papakonstadinou D, Theodossiadis G, Amariotakis A, Georgopoulos G.

Acta Ophthalmol. 2009 May;87(3):323-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2008.01239.x. Epub 2008 Jul 9.

14.

Intraocular pressure measured by dynamic contour tonometer and ocular response analyzer in normal tension glaucoma.

Morita T, Shoji N, Kamiya K, Hagishima M, Fujimura F, Shimizu K.

Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2010 Jan;248(1):73-7. doi: 10.1007/s00417-009-1169-4. Epub 2009 Aug 20.

PMID:
19693527
15.

Factors affecting ocular pulse amplitude in eyes with open angle glaucoma and glaucoma-suspect eyes.

Choi J, Lee J, Park SB, Lee KS, Sung KR, Kook MS.

Acta Ophthalmol. 2012 Sep;90(6):552-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2010.01954.x. Epub 2010 Jun 18.

16.

Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry and their relationship to corneal properties, refractive error, and ocular pulse amplitude.

Erickson DH, Goodwin D, Rollins M, Belaustegui A, Anderson C.

Optometry. 2009 Apr;80(4):169-74. doi: 10.1016/j.optm.2009.01.013.

PMID:
19329059
17.

Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and goldmann applanation tonometry in glaucoma patients and healthy subjects.

Barleon L, Hoffmann EM, Berres M, Pfeiffer N, Grus FH.

Am J Ophthalmol. 2006 Oct;142(4):583-90.

PMID:
17011849
18.

Correlation of intraocular pressure measured with goldmann and dynamic contour tonometry in normal and glaucomatous eyes.

Realini T, Weinreb RN, Hobbs G.

J Glaucoma. 2009 Feb;18(2):119-23. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e31817d23c7.

19.

Comparison of Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in healthy and glaucomatous eyes.

Ceruti P, Morbio R, Marraffa M, Marchini G.

Eye (Lond). 2009 Feb;23(2):262-9. doi: 10.1038/sj.eye.6703102. Epub 2008 Jan 25.

PMID:
18219335
20.

Assessment of factors affecting the difference in intraocular pressure measurements between dynamic contour tonometry and goldmann applanation tonometry.

Wang J, Cayer MM, Descovich D, Kamdeu-Fansi A, Harasymowycz PJ, Li G, Lesk MR.

J Glaucoma. 2011 Oct;20(8):482-7. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181efbe8f.

PMID:
21048515

Supplemental Content

Support Center