Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35628971›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Intraocular Pressure Measurement in Childhood Glaucoma under Standardized General Anaesthesia: The Prospective EyeBIS Study.

Alicja Strzalkowska, Nina Pirlich, Julia V Stingl, Alexander K Schuster, Jasmin Rezapour, Felix M Wagner, Justus Buse, Esther M Hoffmann

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. 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
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. [Glaucoma in infancy and childhood].Die Ophthalmologie · 2023
    Article
  6. It Is All about Pressure.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022
    Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.

Alicja StrzalkowskaDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg, University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5536-5849
Nina PirlichDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg, University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Julia V StinglDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg, University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9684-7753
Alexander K SchusterDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg, University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Jasmin RezapourDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg, University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Felix M WagnerDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg, University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9560-0524
Justus BuseDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg, University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Esther M HoffmannDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg, University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DE

Funding

Pilot & Feasibility ProgramP30DK124723 · NIDDK · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Morgana Lee Mongraw-Chaffin · 2020 to 2026
$11.0M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK124723
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements using iCare® PRO rebound tonometry (iCare) and Perkins applanation tonometry (Perkins) in childhood glaucoma subjects and healthy children and the influence of anaesthesia depth, age and corneal thickness. Material: Prospective clinical, case-control study of children who underwent an ophthalmologic examination under general anaesthesia according to our protocol. Children were 45.45 ± 29.76 months old (mean ± SD (standard deviation)). Of all children, 54.05% were female. IOP was taken three times (T1−T3), according to duration and the depth of anaesthesia. The order of measurement alternated, starting with iCare. Agreement between the device measurements was evaluated using Bland−Altman analysis. Results: 53 glaucoma subjects and 22 healthy controls. Glaucoma subjects: IOP measured with iCare was at T1: 27.2 (18.1−33.8), T2: 21.6 (14.8−30.6), T3: 20.4 mmHg (14.5−27.0) and Perkins 17.5 (12.0−23.0), 15.5 (10.5−20.5), 15.0 mmHg (10.5−21.0) (median ± IQR (interquartile range)). Healthy controls: IOP with iCare: T1: 13.3 (11.1−17.0), T2: 10.6 (8.1−12.4), T3: 9.6 mmHg (7.7−11.7) and Perkins 10.3 (8.0−12.0), 7.0 (5.5−10.5), 7.0 mmHg (5.5−8.5) (median ± IQR). The median IOP was statistically significantly higher with iCare than with Perkins (p < 0.001) in both groups. The mean difference (iCare and Perkins) was 6.0 ± 6.1 mmHg for T1−T3, 7.3 at T1, 6.0 at T2, 4.9 mmHg at T3. Conclusion: The IOP was the highest in glaucoma subjects and healthy children at T1 (under sedation), independently of the measurement method. iCare always leads to higher IOP compared to Perkins in glaucoma and healthy subjects, regardless of the duration of anesthesia.

Indexed as

childhood glaucomaiCare tonometryintraocular pressure measurementPerkins tonometrystandardized anaesthesia

Identifiers

PMID35628971
PMCPMC9144815
OpenAlexW4280570191

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.