To view this page ensure that Adobe Flash Player version 11.1.0 or greater is installed.

Editorial Glaucoma age and social level of the patient. There are other options, such as transpalpebral tonometers, but they lack reliability and the correlation with applanation tonometry is very poor. Conclusions We are hopeful that, in the future, we will be able to use devices with sensors that will provide us with accurate and complex 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 24 Kontiola AI, A new electromechanical method for measuring intraocular pressure, Doc Ophthalmol, 1997;93:265–76. Martinez-de-la-Casa JM, Garcia-Feijoo J, Castillo A, Garcia- Sanchez J, Reproducibility and clinical evaluation of rebound tonometry, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2005;46:4578–80. Kaufmann C, Bachmann LM, Thiel MA, Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2004;45:3118–21. Kotecha A, White ET, Shewry JM, Garway-Heath DF, The relative effects of corneal thickness and age on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry, Br J Ophthalmol, 2005: 89;1572–5. Martinez-de-la-Casa JM, Garcia-Feijoo J, Vico E, et al., Effect of corneal thickness on dynamic contour, rebound, and 6. 7. 8. 9. information on the dynamic behaviour of IOP. Moreover, we will have access to additional information on ocular biomechanical properties which will probably help us to better evaluate and understand the different susceptibility to IOP-related damage. In the future, our work will be to filter all this additional information and determine what parameters are most relevant to improve the clinical management of our glaucoma patients. n Goldmann tonometry, Ophthalmology, 2006;113:2156–62. Pepose JS, Feigenbaum SK, Qazi MA, et al., Changes in corneal biomechanics and intraocular pressure following LASIK using static, dynamic, and noncontact tonometry, Am J Ophthalmol, 2007;143:39–47. Luce DA, Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyser, J Cataract Refract Surg, 2005;31:156–62. Martinez-de-la-Casa JM, Garcia-Feijoo J, Fernandez-Vidal A, et al., Ocular response analyzer versus Goldmann applanation tonometry for intraocular pressure measurements, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2006;47:4410–4. Hong J, Xu J, Wei A, et al., A new tonometer—the Corvis ST tonometer: clinical comparison with noncontact and Goldmann applanation tonometers, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2013;54:659–65. 10. Leonardi M, Leuenberger P, Bertrand D, et al., First steps toward noninvasive intraocular pressure monitoring with a sensing contact lens, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2004;45;3113–7. 11. De Smedt S, Mermoud A, Schnyder C, 24-hour intraocular pressure fluctuation monitoring using an ocular telemetry sensor: tolerability and functionality in healthy subjects, J Glaucoma, 2012;21:539–44. 12. Mansouri K, Medeiros FA, Tafreshi A, Weinreb RN, Continuous 24-hour monitoring of intraocular pressure patterns with a contact lens sensor: safety, tolerability, and reproducibility in patients with glaucoma, Arch Ophthalmol, 2012;130:153–9. EUR OP EAN OP H TH ALMIC RE VIE W