406 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18637107)
1. Effect of corneal thickness on intraocular pressure measurements with the Pascal dynamic contour, Canon TX-10 non-contact and Goldmann applanation tonometers in healthy subjects.
Pelit A; Altan-Yaycioglu R; Pelit A; Akova YA
Clin Exp Optom; 2009 Jan; 92(1):14-8. PubMed ID: 18637107
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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. PubMed ID: 17488456
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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;
Ophthalmology; 2007 Jan; 114(1):20-6. PubMed ID: 17070592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The influence of central corneal thickness and corneal curvature radius on the intraocular pressure as measured by different tonometers: noncontact and goldmann applanation tonometers.
Harada Y; Hirose N; Kubota T; Tawara A
J Glaucoma; 2008 Dec; 17(8):619-25. PubMed ID: 19092456
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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. PubMed ID: 18219335
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Intraocular pressure measurement precision with the Goldmann applanation, dynamic contour, and ocular response analyzer tonometers.
Kotecha A; White E; Schlottmann PG; Garway-Heath DF
Ophthalmology; 2010 Apr; 117(4):730-7. PubMed ID: 20122737
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [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. PubMed ID: 23121701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of Goldmann applanation tonometry, rebound tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in keratoconus.
Özcura F; Yıldırım N; Tambova E; Şahin A
J Optom; 2017; 10(2):117-122. PubMed ID: 27402573
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of Goldmann applanation, non-contact, dynamic contour and tonopen tonometry measurements in healthy and glaucomatous eyes, and effect of central corneal thickness on the measurement results.
Yildiz A; Yasar T
Med Glas (Zenica); 2018 Aug; 15(2):152-157. PubMed ID: 30047543
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The effect of contact lens-induced corneal edema on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry.
Oh JH; Yoo C; Kim YY; Kim HM; Song JS
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2009 Mar; 247(3):371-5. PubMed ID: 18843499
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The relationship between diurnal variations in intraocular pressure measurements and central corneal thickness and corneal hysteresis.
Kotecha A; Crabb DP; Spratt A; Garway-Heath DF
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2009 Sep; 50(9):4229-36. PubMed ID: 19407025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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. PubMed ID: 21173706
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of central corneal thickness and corneal hysteresis on tonometry as measured by dynamic contour tonometry, ocular response analyzer, and Goldmann tonometry in glaucomatous eyes.
Hager A; Loge K; Schroeder B; Füllhas MO; Wiegand W
J Glaucoma; 2008 Aug; 17(5):361-5. PubMed ID: 18703945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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. PubMed ID: 17011849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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. PubMed ID: 18631335
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Dynamic contour tonometry versus Goldmann applanation tonometry: a comparative study.
Pache M; Wilmsmeyer S; Lautebach S; Funk J
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2005 Aug; 243(8):763-7. PubMed ID: 15756572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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.
Tonnu PA; Ho T; Newson T; El Sheikh A; Sharma K; White E; Bunce C; Garway-Heath D
Br J Ophthalmol; 2005 Jul; 89(7):851-4. PubMed ID: 15965165
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of intraocular pressures after myopic laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy: tonometry-pachymetry, Goldmann applanation tonometry, dynamic contour tonometry, and noncontact tonometry.
Han KE; Kim H; Kim NR; Jun I; Kim EK; Kim TI
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2013 Jun; 39(6):888-97. PubMed ID: 23688875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of IOP measurement by ocular response analyzer, dynamic contour, Goldmann applanation, and noncontact tonometry.
Oncel B; Dinc U; Orge F; Yalvac B
Eur J Ophthalmol; 2009; 19(6):936-41. PubMed ID: 19882585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and goldmann applanation tonometry in deep lamellar and penetrating keratoplasties.
Ceruti P; Morbio R; Marraffa M; Marchini G
Am J Ophthalmol; 2008 Feb; 145(2):215-221. PubMed ID: 18222191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
