title: Change in intraocular pressure during point-of-care ultrasound.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Point-of-care ocular ultrasound (US) is a valuable tool for the evaluation of traumatic ocular injuries. Conventionally, any maneuver that may increase intraocular pressure (IOP) is relatively contraindicated in the setting of globe rupture. Some authors have cautioned against the use of US in these scenarios because of a theoretical concern that an US examination may cause or exacerbate the extrusion of intraocular contents. This study set out to investigate whether ocular US affects IOP. The secondary objective was to validate the intraocular pressure measurements obtained with the Diaton® as compared with standard applanation techniques (the Tono-Pen®).
  
  
  METHODS
  We enrolled a convenience sample of healthy adult volunteers. We obtained the baseline IOP for each patient by using a transpalpebral tonometer. Ocular US was then performed on each subject using a high-frequency linear array transducer, and a second IOP was obtained during the US examination. A third IOP measurement was obtained following the completion of the US examination. To validate transpalpebral measurement, a subset of subjects also underwent traditional transcorneal applanation tonometry prior to the US examination as a baseline measurement. In a subset of 10 patients, we obtained baseline pre-ultrasound IOP measurements with the Diaton® and Tono-Pen®, and then compared them.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The study included 40 subjects. IOP values during ocular US examination were slightly greater than baseline (average +1.8mmHg, p=0.01). Post-US examination IOP values were not significantly different than baseline (average -0.15mmHg, p=0.42). In a subset of 10 subjects, IOP values were not significantly different between transpalpebral and transcorneal tonometry (average +0.03mmHg, p=0.07).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In healthy volunteer subjects, point-of-care ocular US causes a small and transient increase in IOP. We also showed no difference between the Diaton® and Tono-Pen® methods of IOP measurement. Overall, the resulting change in IOP with US transducer placement is considerably less than the mean diurnal variation in healthy subjects, or pressure generated by physical examination, and is therefore unlikely to be clinically significant. However, it is important to take caution when performing ocular ultrasound, since it is unclear what the change in IOP would be in patients with ocular trauma.
authors.affiliation: North Memorial Health Care, Department of Emergency Medicine, Robbinsdale, Minnesota.
authors.forename: Cameron
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Berg
authors.affiliation: University of California, San Francisco Benioff Children's Hospital Oakland, Division of Emergency Medicine, Oakland, California.
authors.forename: Stephanie J
authors.initials: SJ
authors.lastname: Doniger
authors.affiliation: Kaiser Permanente, San Francisco Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Palo Alto, California.
authors.forename: Brita
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Zaia
authors.affiliation: Stanford University Medical Center, Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Surgery, Palo Alto, California.
authors.forename: Sarah R
authors.initials: SR
authors.lastname: Williams
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007429:Intraocular Pressure; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D019095:Point-of-Care Systems; D011446:Prospective Studies; D014065:Tonometry, Ocular / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: Anesthesiology. 2003 Jul;99(1):220-3
references.pmid: 12826863
references.citation: Ann Emerg Med. 2007 Apr;49(4):508-14
references.pmid: 16997419
references.citation: West J Emerg Med. 2009 Nov;10(4):263-6
references.pmid: 20046246
references.citation: Am J Ophthalmol. 2014 Dec;158(6):1348-1352.e1
references.pmid: 25217858
references.citation: Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2012 May-Jun;40(4):e171-5
references.pmid: 21718408
references.citation: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2010 Dec;248(12):1765-70
references.pmid: 20495818
references.citation: Am J Ophthalmol. 2002 Dec;134(6):926-7
references.pmid: 12470773
references.citation: J Emerg Med. 2011 Jan;40(1):53-7
references.pmid: 19625159
references.citation: BMC Ophthalmol. 2013;13:44
references.pmid: 24006952
references.citation: Am J Ophthalmol. 2001 Apr;131(4):417-20
references.pmid: 11292401
references.citation: Arch Ophthalmol. 1963 Jun;69:752-7
references.pmid: 14026102
references.citation: Br J Ophthalmol. 2005 Mar;89(3):280-3
references.pmid: 15722303
references.citation: Acad Emerg Med. 2002 Aug;9(8):791-9
references.pmid: 12153883
references.citation: Ophthalmologica. 2012;228(1):42-6
references.pmid: 22398455
references.citation: Optom Vis Sci. 2013 Jul;90(7):700-6
references.pmid: 23708927
references.citation: Ann Emerg Med. 2015 Feb;65(2):199-203.e1
references.pmid: 24680547
references.citation: Ann Emerg Med. 2009 Apr;53(4):550-70
references.pmid: 19303521
references.citation: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2005 Apr;243(4):313-6
references.pmid: 15864620
references.citation: Br J Ophthalmol. 1982 Jan;66(1):43-5
references.pmid: 7055542