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

Effect of eyelid muscle action and rubbing on telemetrically obtained intraocular pressure in patients with glaucoma with an IOP sensor implant

BACKGROUND

Patients with glaucoma on topical glaucoma medication are often affected by dry eye symptoms and thus likely to rub or squeeze their eyelids. Here, we telemetrically measure peak intraocular pressure (IOP) during eyelid manoeuvres and eyelid rubbing.

METHODS

Eleven patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) previously implanted with a telemetric IOP sensor (Eyemate-IO) were instructed to look straight ahead for 1 min as a baseline measurement. Next, 6 repeats of blinking on instruction with 10 s intervals in between were performed. In addition, 5 repeats of eyelid closure (n=9), eyelid squeezing and eyelid rubbing (n=7) were performed with 15 s intervals in between. IOP was recorded via an external antenna placed around the study eye. Average peak IOP increases from baseline were analysed and tested against zero (no change) with one-sample t-tests.

RESULTS

For eyelid rubbing, the average peak ∆ IOP increase (mean±SEM) was 59.1±9.6 mm Hg (p<0.001) from baseline. It was 42.2±5.8 mm Hg (p<0.0001) for eyelid squeezing, 3.8±0.6 mm Hg (n=9, p<0.01) for eyelid closure and 11.6±2.4 mm Hg (p<0.001) for voluntary blinking. No IOP change except for a short irregularity in the ocular pulse was observed during involuntary blinking.

CONCLUSION

Eyelid manoeuvres in patients with POAG elicited brief increases in IOP that were particularly large with squeezing and rubbing. Further investigation of the potential implications for glaucoma progression is warranted.

Biomechanical homeostasis in ocular diseases: A mini-review

Diabetes mellitus-induced hyperglycemia is responsible for multiple pathological ocular alternations from vasculopathy to biomechanical dyshomeostasis. Biomechanical homeostasis is crucial to maintain the normal physiological condition of the eyes. Biomechanical features vary in eye tissues regarding different anatomical positions, tissue components, and cellular functions. The disturbance in biomechanical homeostasis may result in different ocular diseases. In this review, we provide a preliminary sketch of the latest evidence on the mechano-environment of the eyeball and its possible influencing factors, thereby underscoring the relationship between the dyshomeostasis of ocular biomechanics and common eye diseases (e.g., diabetic retinopathy, keratoconus, glaucoma, spaceflight-associated neuro-ocular syndrome, retinal vein occlusion and myopia, etc.). Together with the reported evidence, we further discuss and postulate the potential role of biomechanical homeostasis in ophthalmic pathology. Some latest strategies to investigate the biomechanical properties in ocular diseases help unveil the pathological changes at multiple scales, offering references for making new diagnostic and treatment strategies targeting mechanobiology.

Intraocular pressure at different gaze positions in patients with highly myopic strabismus

PURPOSE

To evaluate intraocular pressure (IOP) at different gaze positions in patients with highly myopic strabismus (HMS).

STUDY DESIGN

Nonrandomized, prospective, observational study.

METHODS

This study included 18 eyes of 14 patients with HMS and 51 eyes of 51 age-matched controls without strabismus; these were further divided into two groups based on refractive errors: > -6.00 diopter (D) (n = 22 eyes) and ≤ -6.00 D (n = 29 eyes). IOP was measured in primary and side gazes and compared within and among groups. The relationships between IOPs and axial length, angle of globe dislocation measured on magnetic resonance imaging, strabismus angle, and degree of abduction deficit were studied.

RESULTS

The HMS group showed higher IOP in abduction (19.3 ± 4.9 mmHg) than in the primary (12.5 ± 4.3 mmHg) and adducting positions (13.0 ± 3.3 mmHg), (p < 0.001). The IOP in the adducting position in the HMS group (13.0 ± 3.3 mmHg) was lower than in the control groups both with (17.6 ± 3.5 mmHg) and without (16.9 ± 4.1 mmHg) high myopia, ; (p < 0.001 and = 0.003). The difference in IOP between abduction and adduction was significantly larger in the HMS group (6.4 ± 4.6 mmHg) compared to others (p < 0.001) and positively correlated with the strabismus angle and the angle of globe dislocation and negatively with abduction deficit.

CONCLUSION

The IOP of patients with HMS changes dramatically on side gazes, therefore, care should be taken while measuring IOP.