Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33956052›Full record

ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2021

Implanted Microsensor Continuous IOP Telemetry Suggests Gaze and Eyelid Closure Effects on IOP-A Preliminary Study.

Jacqueline J O N van den Bosch, Vincenzo Pennisi, Azzurra Invernizzi, Kaweh Mansouri, Robert N Weinreb, Hagen Thieme, Michael B Hoffmann, Lars Choritz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Horizontal Gaze Tolerance and Its Effects on Visual Sensitivity in Glaucoma.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Jacqueline J O N van den BoschDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Germany.
Vincenzo PennisiDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Germany.
Azzurra InvernizziLaboratory for Experimental Ophthalmology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Kaweh MansouriGlaucoma Research Center, Montchoisi Clinic, Swiss Visio, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Robert N WeinrebHamilton Glaucoma Center, Viterbi Family Department of Ophthalmology and Shiley Eye Institute, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States.
Hagen ThiemeDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Germany.
Michael B HoffmannDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Germany.
Lars ChoritzDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Germany.
University Hospital Magdeburg · DEImplandata Ophthalmic Products (Germany) · DEUniversity of California, San Diego · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · USUniversity of Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To explore the effect of gaze direction and eyelid closure on intraocular pressure (IOP). Methods: Eleven patients with primary open-angle glaucoma previously implanted with a telemetric IOP sensor were instructed to view eight equally-spaced fixation targets each at three eccentricities (10°, 20°, and 25°). Nine patients also performed eyelid closure. IOP was recorded via an external antenna placed around the study eye. Differences of mean IOP between consecutive gaze positions were calculated. Furthermore, the effect of eyelid closure on gaze-dependent IOP was assessed. Results: The maximum IOP increase was observed at 25° superior gaze (mean ± SD: 4.4 ± 4.9 mm Hg) and maximum decrease at 25° inferonasal gaze (-1.6 ± 0.8 mm Hg). There was a significant interaction between gaze direction and eccentricity (P = 0.003). Post-hoc tests confirmed significant decreases inferonasally for all eccentricities (mean ± SEM: 10°: -0.7 ± 0.2, P = 0.007; 20°: -1.1 ± 0.2, P = 0.006; and 25°: -1.6 ± 0.2, P = 0.006). Eight of 11 eyes showed significant IOP differences between superior and inferonasal gaze at 25°. IOP decreased during eyelid closure, which was significantly lower than downgaze at 25° (mean ± SEM: -2.1 ± 0.3 mm Hg vs. -0.7 ± 0.2 mm Hg, P = 0.014). Conclusions: Our data suggest that IOP varies reproducibly with gaze direction, albeit with patient variability. IOP generally increased in upgaze but decreased in inferonasal gaze and on eyelid closure. Future studies should investigate the patient variability and IOP dynamics.

Indexed as

AgedBiosensing TechniquesElectrodes, ImplantedEquipment DesignEyelidsFemaleFixation, OcularGlaucoma, Open-AngleHumansIntraocular PressureMaleMiddle AgedTelemetryTonometry, Ocular

Identifiers

PMID33956052
PMCPMC8107486
OpenAlexW3159295968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.