European journal of ophthalmology · 2024
The Water Drinking Provocation Test- an aid to decision making in the management of OHT and POAG.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Lele Alpana, Pal Shabari, Goel Upsham
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To study response to water drinking provocation in primary open angle glaucoma (POAG), ocular hypertensives and glaucoma suspects and establish the role of water drinking provocation test (WDPT) as a relevant supplementary tool in glaucoma management.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 319 eyes of 161 patients were included in the study after retrospectively analyzing hospital records of patients who underwent WDPT. The patients were categorized into Group A (POAG on treatment), Group B (treatment-naïve POAG), Group C (Ocular hypertensives), Group D (glaucoma suspects). All patients were asked to drink 1 liter of water within 5 min and intraocular pressures (IOP) were recorded after 20 and 30 min of water intake. The baseline, peak and IOP fluctuation were analysed. A fluctuation of ≥ 5 mm Hg was considered positive response.
RESULTS: 19 eyes were categorized as Group A, 58 as Group B, 96 and 146 eyes as groups C and D respectively. Baseline IOP in different groups differed significantly. Mean peak IOP was higher in Groups B and C, followed by Groups A and D. Mean IOP fluctuation differed significantly across groups being maximum in Group A (7.0 ± 2.5) and minimum in Group D (4.8 ± 2.9). Positive WDPT response was seen in 89.5% eyes in Group A, 77.6% of those in Group B, 55.2% and 48.6% in Groups C and D respectively. The baseline IOP had a significant positive correlation with the peak IOP across all groups.
CONCLUSION: The WDPT is an inexpensive practical tool which serves as an invaluable aid in glaucoma management.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 319 eyes of 161 patients were included in the study after retrospectively analyzing hospital records of patients who underwent WDPT. The patients were categorized into Group A (POAG on treatment), Group B (treatment-naïve POAG), Group C (Ocular hypertensives), Group D (glaucoma suspects). All patients were asked to drink 1 liter of water within 5 min and intraocular pressures (IOP) were recorded after 20 and 30 min of water intake. The baseline, peak and IOP fluctuation were analysed. A fluctuation of ≥ 5 mm Hg was considered positive response.
RESULTS: 19 eyes were categorized as Group A, 58 as Group B, 96 and 146 eyes as groups C and D respectively. Baseline IOP in different groups differed significantly. Mean peak IOP was higher in Groups B and C, followed by Groups A and D. Mean IOP fluctuation differed significantly across groups being maximum in Group A (7.0 ± 2.5) and minimum in Group D (4.8 ± 2.9). Positive WDPT response was seen in 89.5% eyes in Group A, 77.6% of those in Group B, 55.2% and 48.6% in Groups C and D respectively. The baseline IOP had a significant positive correlation with the peak IOP across all groups.
CONCLUSION: The WDPT is an inexpensive practical tool which serves as an invaluable aid in glaucoma management.