Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society · 2002
Angle closure in younger patients.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chang Brian M, Liebmann Jeffrey M, Ritch Robert
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Angle-closure glaucoma is rare in children and young adults. Only scattered cases associated with specific clinical entities have been reported. We evaluated the findings in patients in our database aged 40 or younger with angle closure.
METHODS: Our database was searched for patients with angle closure who were 40 years old or younger. Data recorded included age at initial consultation; age at the time of diagnosis; gender; results of slit-lamp examination, gonioscopy, and ultrasound biomicroscopy (from 1993 onward); clinical diagnosis; and therapy. Patients with previous incisional surgery were excluded, as were patients with anterior chamber proliferative mechanisms leading to angle closure.
RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients (49 females, 18 males) met entry criteria. Mean age (+/- SD) at the time of consultation was 34.4 +/- 9.4 years (range, 3-68 years). Diagnoses included plateau iris syndrome (35 patients), iridociliary cysts (8 patients), retinopathy of prematurity (7 patients), uveitis (5 patients), isolated nanophthalmos (3 patients), relative pupillary block (2 patients), Weill-Marchesani syndrome (3 patients), and 1 patient each with Marfan syndrome, miotic-induced angle closure, persistent hyperplastic primary vitreous, and idiopathic lens subluxation.
CONCLUSION: The etiology of angle closure in young persons is different from that in the older population and is typically associated with structural or developmental ocular anomalies rather than relative pupillary block. Following laser iridotomy, these eyes should be monitored for recurrent angle closure and the need for additional laser or incisional surgical intervention.
METHODS: Our database was searched for patients with angle closure who were 40 years old or younger. Data recorded included age at initial consultation; age at the time of diagnosis; gender; results of slit-lamp examination, gonioscopy, and ultrasound biomicroscopy (from 1993 onward); clinical diagnosis; and therapy. Patients with previous incisional surgery were excluded, as were patients with anterior chamber proliferative mechanisms leading to angle closure.
RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients (49 females, 18 males) met entry criteria. Mean age (+/- SD) at the time of consultation was 34.4 +/- 9.4 years (range, 3-68 years). Diagnoses included plateau iris syndrome (35 patients), iridociliary cysts (8 patients), retinopathy of prematurity (7 patients), uveitis (5 patients), isolated nanophthalmos (3 patients), relative pupillary block (2 patients), Weill-Marchesani syndrome (3 patients), and 1 patient each with Marfan syndrome, miotic-induced angle closure, persistent hyperplastic primary vitreous, and idiopathic lens subluxation.
CONCLUSION: The etiology of angle closure in young persons is different from that in the older population and is typically associated with structural or developmental ocular anomalies rather than relative pupillary block. Following laser iridotomy, these eyes should be monitored for recurrent angle closure and the need for additional laser or incisional surgical intervention.