MATERIALS AND METHODS: A review of observational studies was conducted to discuss the accuracy, tolerability and ease of use of tonometers in measuring IOP in children with glaucoma.
RESULTS: Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and its portable handheld versions remain the gold standard in measuring IOP. Tono-Pen (Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Depew, New York, USA) and rebound tonometer (RBT) both correlate well with GAT. Although both tonometers tend to overestimate IOP, Tono-Pen overestimates more than RBT. Overestimation is more remarkable in higher IOP and corneal pathologies (such as but not limited to scarred cornea and denser corneal opacity). RBT was better tolerated than other tonometers in children and was easier to use in children of all ages.
CONCLUSIONS: RBT is the preferred tonometer for measuring IOP in children with glaucoma, as it is less traumatic, time efficient and does not require fluorescein dye or anaesthesia. However, examiners should use a second tonometer to confirm elevated IOP readings from the RBT.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical characteristics, including 24-hour ocular perfusion pressure and risk of progression in patients with baseline central VF defect, as compared with those with peripheral VF defect in NTG.
DESIGN: This was a prospective, longitudinal study.
METHODS: A total of 65 NTG patients who completed 5 years of follow-up were included in this study. All the enrolled patients underwent baseline 24-hour intraocular pressure and blood pressure monitoring via 2-hourly measurements in their habitual position and had ≥5 reliable VF tests during the 5-year follow-up. Patients were assigned to two groups on the basis of VF defect locations at baseline, the central 10 degrees, and the peripheral 10- to 24-degree area. Modified Anderson criteria were used to assess global VF progression over 5 years. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to compare the elapsed time of confirmed VF progression in the two groups. Hazard ratios for the association between clinical risk factors and VF progression were obtained by using Cox proportional hazards models.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the patients with baseline central and peripheral VF defects in terms of demography, clinical, ocular and systemic hemodynamic factors. Eyes with baseline defects involving the central fields progressed faster (difference: βcentral=-0.78 dB/y, 95% confidence interval=-0.22 to -1.33, P=0.007) and have 3.56 times higher hazard of progressing (95% confidence interval=1.17-10.82, P=0.025) than those with only peripheral defects.
CONCLUSION: NTG patients with baseline central VF involvement are at increased risk of progression compared with those with peripheral VF defect.
METHODS: Observational study. Nonglaucomatous patients on NIPD underwent systemic and ocular assessment including mean arterial pressure (MAP), body weight, serum osmolarity, visual acuity, IOP measurement, and ASOCT within 2 hours both before and after NIPD. The Zhongshan Angle Assessment Program (ZAAP) was used to measure ASOCT parameters including anterior chamber depth, anterior chamber width, anterior chamber area, anterior chamber volume, lens vault, angle opening distance, trabecular-iris space area, and angle recess area. T tests and Pearson correlation tests were performed with P<0.05 considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: A total of 46 eyes from 46 patients were included in the analysis. There were statistically significant reductions in IOP (-1.8±0.6 mm Hg, P=0.003), MAP (-11.9±3.1 mm Hg, P<0.001), body weight (-0.7±2.8 kg, P<0.001), and serum osmolarity (-3.4±2.0 mOsm/L, P=0.002) after NIPD. All the ASOCT parameters did not have any statistically significant changes after NIPD. There were no statistically significant correlations between the changes in IOP, MAP, body weight, and serum osmolarity (all P>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: NIPD results in reductions in IOP, MAP, body weight, and serum osmolarity in nonglaucomatous patients.
DESIGN: A cross-sectional, non-interventional study.
METHODS: The IOP measurements by handheld Icare rebound tonometer (Finland) were first performed by a primary care physician. Then the IOP was measured using Perkins Mk3 applanation tonometer (Haag-Streit, UK) by an ophthalmologist who was masked to previous readings from the Icare rebound tonometer. The mean IOP measured by each tonometer was compared. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to explore the correlation between the IOP measurements of the 2 instruments. The level of agreement between them was assessed using the Bland and Altman method.
RESULTS: A total of 420 left eyes were examined. The mean age of subjects was 38.6 ± 18.2 years. Approximately 67% of subjects were female. The mean IOP was 16.3 ± 4.0 mm Hg using Icare and 13.4 ± 2.3 mm Hg using PAT. Pearson correlation coefficient showed a moderate positive correlation between the 2 methods (r = +0.524, P < 0.001). Linear regression analysis revealed a slope of 0.28 with R² of 0.255. The mean difference between the 2 methods was 2.90 ± 3.5 mm Hg and the sample t-test revealed a statistically significant mean difference from 0 (P < 0.001). The 95% limits of agreement between the 2 methods were between -9.73 and 3.93 mm Hg.
CONCLUSIONS: The handheld Icare rebound tonometer is a reasonably acceptable screening tool in community practices. However, Icare overestimated IOP with a mean of 2.90 mm Hg higher than the PAT. Thus, using Goldmann applanation tonometer as a confirmatory measurement tool of IOP is suggested.
PURPOSE: The present study aims to look at the association between CH and severity of OSAS, and whether CH could be another link between OSAS and the development of glaucoma.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, observational study at the University Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur. Patients undergoing polysomnography for assessment of OSAS were recruited. We measured central corneal thickness (CCT) using optical biometry, and CH using ocular response analysis. Intraocular pressure (IOP) and Humphrey visual field (HVF) indices were also measured. The Apnea Hypopnea Index (AHI) divided patients into normal, mild, moderate, and severe OSAS categories. The normal and mild categories (47.9%) were then collectively called group 1, and the moderate and severe categories (52.1%) were called group 2. T tests, Pearson correlation tests, and general linear model analysis were performed, with P .05). CH correlated negatively with AHI (r = -0.229, P = .013) and positively with lowest oxygen saturation (r = 0.213, P = .022).
CONCLUSIONS: CH is lower in moderate/severe OSAS than in normal/mild cases. This may be another link between OSAS and the development of glaucoma; further studies are indicated to determine the significance of this connection.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 100 eyes from 50 patients on long-term intranasal steroids (>2 y) for allergic rhinitis and 90 eyes from 45 controls were included in this study. Patients on other forms of steroids and risk factors for glaucoma were excluded. IOP was measured and nonmydriatic stereoscopic optic disc photos were taken for each eye. The vertical cup-to-disc ratio and the status of the optic disc were evaluated.
RESULTS: The mean IOP for intranasal steroids group was significantly higher (15.24±2.31 mm Hg) compared to the control group (13.91±1.86 mm Hg; P=0.000). However, there were no significant differences in the vertical cup-to-disc ratio and the status of glaucomatous optic disc changes between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged use of intranasal steroids cause statistical significant increase in IOP in patients with allergic rhinitis although no significant glaucomatous disc changes were seen. We suggest patients on long-term use of intranasal steroid have a yearly eye examination to be monitored for IOP elevation and those with additional risk factors for glaucoma is closely monitored for glaucoma.
METHODS: This was a prospective observational study carried out at a tertiary referral centre. POAG patients on topical antiglaucoma medications and planned for phaco-ECP were recruited. WDT was performed before surgery and 6 weeks postoperatively by drinking 10 mL/kg of water in 5 min followed by serial IOP by Goldmann applanation tonometry measurements at 15, 30, 45, and 60 min. Mean IOP, IOP fluctuation (difference between highest and lowest IOP), IOP reduction, and factors affecting IOP fluctuation were analysed.
RESULTS: Twenty eyes from 17 patients were included. Baseline IOP was similar before (14.7 ± 2.7 mm Hg) and after (14.8 ± 3.4 mm Hg, p = 0.90) surgery. There was no difference in mean IOP (17.6 ± 3.4 mm Hg vs. 19.3 ± 4.7 mm Hg pre- and postoperative, respectively, p = 0.26) or peak IOP (19.37 ± 3.74 mm Hg vs. 21.23 ± 5.29 mm Hg, p = 0.25), albeit a significant reduction in IOP-lowering medications (2.2 ± 1.15 vs. 0.35 ± 0.93, p < 0.001) postoperatively. IOP fluctuation was significantly greater (6.4 ± 3.2 mm Hg vs. 4.6 ± 2.1 mm Hg, p = 0.015) with more eyes having significant IOP fluctuation of ≥6 mm Hg (11 eyes [55%] vs. 4 eyes [20%], p < 0.001) postoperatively. Factors that were significantly associated with increased postoperative IOP fluctuations were higher preoperative IOP fluctuation (β = 0.69, 95% CI 0.379-1.582, p = 0.004) and more number of postoperative antiglaucoma medications (β = 0.627, 95% CI 0.614-3.322, p = 0.008).
CONCLUSION: Reducing aqueous production with phaco-ECP does not eliminate IOP fluctuation in POAG patients. The increase in postoperative IOP fluctuation suggests increased outflow resistance after phaco-ECP.
METHODS: We measured psychophysical contrast thresholds in one eye of 16 control subjects and 19 patients aged 67.8 ± 5.65 and 71.9 ± 7.15, respectively, (mean ± SD). Patients ranged in disease severity from suspects to severe glaucoma. We used the 17-region FDT-perimeter C20-threshold program and a custom 9-region test (R9) with similar visual field coverage. The R9 stimuli scaled their spatial frequencies with eccentricity and were modulated at lower temporal frequencies than C20 and thus did not display a clear spatial frequency-doubling (FD) appearance. Based on the overlapping areas of the stimuli, we transformed the C20 results to 9 measures for direct comparison with R9. We also compared mfVEP-based and psychophysical contrast thresholds in 26 younger (26.6 ± 7.3 y, mean ± SD) and 20 older normal control subjects (66.5 ± 7.3 y) control subjects using the R9 stimuli.
RESULTS: The best intraclass correlations between R9/C20 thresholds were for the central and outer regions: 0.82 ± 0.05 (mean ± SD, p ≤ 0.0001). The areas under receiver operator characteristic plots for C20 and R9 were as high as 0.99 ± 0.012 (mean ± SE). Canonical correlation analysis (CCA) showed significant correlation (r = 0.638, p = 0.029) with 1 dimension of the C20 and R9 data, suggesting that the lower and higher temporal frequency tests probed the same neural mechanism(s). Low signal quality made the contrast-threshold mfVEPs non-viable. The resulting mfVEP thresholds were limited by noise to artificially high contrasts, which unlike the psychophysical versions, were not correlated with age.
CONCLUSION: The lower temporal frequency R9 stimuli had similar diagnostic power to the FDT-C20 stimuli. CCA indicated the both stimuli drove similar neural mechanisms, possibly suggesting no advantage of FD stimuli for mfVEPs. Given that the contrast-threshold mfVEPs were non-viable, we used the present and published results to make recommendations for future mfVEP tests.
METHOD: A meta-analysis was conducted to determine the potential impact of isometric exercise on IOP and OPP. The literature on the relationship between isometric resistance exercise and IOP was systematically searched according to the "Cochrane Handbook" in the databases of Pubmed, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Scopus through December 31, 2020. The search terms used were "exercise," "train," "isometric," "intraocular pressure," and "ocular perfusion pressure," and the mean differences of the data were analyzed using the Stata 16.0 software, with a 95% confidence interval.
RESULTS: A total of 13 studies, which included 268 adult participants consisting of 162 men and 106 women, were selected. All the exercise programs that were included were isometric resistance exercises of the lower limbs with intervention times of 1min, 2min, or 6min. The increase in IOP after intervention was as follows: I2=87.1%, P=0.001 using random-effects model combined statistics, SMD=1.03 (0.48, 1.59), and the increase in OPP was as follows: I2=94.5%, P=0.001 using random-effects model combined statistics, SMD=2.94 (1.65, 4.22), with both results showing high heterogeneity.
CONCLUSION: As isometric exercise may cause an increase in IOP and OPP, therefore, people with glaucoma and related high risk should perform isometric exercise with caution.