324 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21447674)
1. Comparison of the ocular response analyzer and the Goldmann applanation tonometer for measuring intraocular pressure after deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty.
Feizi S; Hashemloo A; Rastegarpour A
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2011 Jul; 52(8):5887-91. PubMed ID: 21447674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. A clinical description of Ocular Response Analyzer measurements.
Lau W; Pye D
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2011 May; 52(6):2911-6. PubMed ID: 21273535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of intraocular pressure measurement using 4 different instruments following penetrating keratoplasty.
Chou CY; Jordan CA; McGhee CN; Patel DV
Am J Ophthalmol; 2012 Mar; 153(3):412-8. PubMed ID: 22000702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Corneal thickness- and age-related biomechanical properties of the cornea measured with the ocular response analyzer.
Kotecha A; Elsheikh A; Roberts CR; Zhu H; Garway-Heath DF
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2006 Dec; 47(12):5337-47. PubMed ID: 17122122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Goldmann applanation tonometry versus ocular response analyzer for intraocular pressure measurements in keratoconic eyes.
Goldich Y; Barkana Y; Avni I; Zadok D
Cornea; 2010 Sep; 29(9):1011-5. PubMed ID: 20539214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Graft biomechanical properties after penetrating keratoplasty in keratoconus.
Feizi S; Einollahi B; Yazdani S; Hashemloo A
Cornea; 2012 Aug; 31(8):855-8. PubMed ID: 22357385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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. PubMed ID: 22310080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The effect of thin, thick, and normal corneas on Goldmann intraocular pressure measurements and correction formulae in individual eyes.
Park SJ; Ang GS; Nicholas S; Wells AP
Ophthalmology; 2012 Mar; 119(3):443-9. PubMed ID: 22035576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Can Corneal Biomechanical Properties Explain Difference in Tonometric Measurement in Normal Eyes?
Dey A; David RL; Asokan R; George R
Optom Vis Sci; 2018 Feb; 95(2):120-128. PubMed ID: 29370019
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Corneal biomechanics and intraocular pressure assessment after penetrating keratoplasty for non keratoconic patients, long term results.
Abd Elaziz MS; Elsobky HM; Zaky AG; Hassan EAM; KhalafAllah MT
BMC Ophthalmol; 2019 Aug; 19(1):172. PubMed ID: 31391006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Accuracy of Goldmann, ocular response analyser, Pascal and TonoPen XL tonometry in keratoconic and normal eyes.
Mollan SP; Wolffsohn JS; Nessim M; Laiquzzaman M; Sivakumar S; Hartley S; Shah S
Br J Ophthalmol; 2008 Dec; 92(12):1661-5. PubMed ID: 18757471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Comparison of I Care rebound tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometer after Descemet's stripping with automated endothelium keratoplasty].
Li BZ; Hong J; Peng RM; Wang X; Ren J; Wu LL
Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2013 Mar; 49(3):257-62. PubMed ID: 23866708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Modifications in corneal biomechanics and intraocular pressure after deep sclerectomy.
Iordanidou V; Hamard P; Gendron G; Labbé A; Raphael M; Baudouin C
J Glaucoma; 2010; 19(4):252-6. PubMed ID: 19661821
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with goldmann applanation tonometry.
Kaufmann C; Bachmann LM; Thiel MA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2004 Sep; 45(9):3118-21. PubMed ID: 15326129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Influence of corneal structure, corneal responsiveness, and other ocular parameters on tonometric measurement of intraocular pressure.
Broman AT; Congdon NG; Bandeen-Roche K; Quigley HA
J Glaucoma; 2007; 16(7):581-8. PubMed ID: 18091174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of iCare tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometry in normal corneas and in eyes with automated lamellar and penetrating keratoplasty.
Salvetat ML; Zeppieri M; Miani F; Tosoni C; Parisi L; Brusini P
Eye (Lond); 2011 May; 25(5):642-50. PubMed ID: 21436848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
