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.
METHODS: This was a retrospective, non-interventional, cohort study using data from a Japanese medical claims database. Patients with glaucoma aged ≥20 years with a first drug claim for glaucoma treatment between 01 July 2005 and 30 October 2014 and with data for > 6 months before and after this first prescription were included. The primary endpoint was duration of drug persistence among glaucoma patients with and without the use of fixed combination drugs in the year following initiation of second-line combination treatment.
RESULTS: Of 1403 patients included in the analysis, 364 (25.94%) received fixed combination drugs and 1039 (74.06%) received unfixed combination drugs as second-line treatment. Baseline characteristics were generally comparable between the groups. A total of 39.01% of patients on fixed combination drugs, compared with 41.67% of patients on unfixed combination drugs, persisted on their glaucoma drugs 12 months post second-index date. Median persistence durations for the fixed combination drugs and unfixed combination drugs groups were 6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5-8) and 7 months (95% CI 6-9), respectively. Patients who received prostaglandin analogs (PGAs) were the most persistent with their treatment (n = 99, 12.84%). Patients diagnosed with primary open-angle glaucoma were less likely to experience treatment modification (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.800, 95% CI 0.649-0.986, P = 0.036), while those diagnosed with secondary glaucoma were more likely to experience treatment modification (HR: 1.678, 95% CI 1.231-2.288, P = 0.001) compared with glaucoma suspects.
CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective claims database study, the persistence rate of second-line glaucoma combination treatment was low, with no difference in persistence between glaucoma patients receiving unfixed combination drugs compared with fixed combination drugs. Patients on PGA showed greater persistence rates compared with other treatments.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) measurement can be used to detect glaucoma in uveitic eyes with elevated intraocular pressure (IOP).
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Comparative case series of RNFL measurement using optical coherence tomography performed from May 1, 2010, through October 31, 2012, at a tertiary referral center. We assigned 536 eyes with uveitis (309 patients) in the following groups: normal contralateral eyes with unilateral uveitis (n = 72), normotensive uveitis (Uv-N) (n = 143), raised IOP and normal optic disc and/or visual field (Uv-H) (n = 233), and raised IOP and glaucomatous disc and/or visual field (Uv-G) (n = 88).
EXPOSURES: Eyes with uveitis and elevated IOP (>21 mm Hg) on at least 2 occasions.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Comparison of RNFL values between groups of eyes and correlation with clinical data; risk factors for raised IOP, glaucoma, and RNFL thinning.
RESULTS: Mean (SD) global RNFL was thicker in Uv-N (106.4 [21.4] µm) compared with control (96.0 [9.0] µm; P glaucoma and RNFL defect.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Screening for glaucomatous RNFL changes in uveitis must be performed during quiescent periods. Thinning of the inferior quadrant suggests that glaucomatous damage, more than uveitic ocular hypertension, is in fact occurring. Measurement of RNFL may detect signs of damage before disc or visual field changes and therefore identifies a subgroup that should receive more aggressive treatment.
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.