Journal of glaucoma · 2015
Comparison of ocular biometry between eyes with chronic primary angle-closure glaucoma and their fellow eyes with primary angle-closure or primary angle-closure suspect.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Huang Jingjing, Wang Zhonghao, Wu Ziqiang, Li Zuohong, Lai Kunbei, Ge Jian
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the eye with chronic primary angle-closure glaucoma (CPACG) with its fellow eye without glaucoma damage and to determine the biometric differences that may predispose to development of CPACG.
METHODS: Consecutive patients diagnosed with CPACG in 1 eye and primary angle-closure (PAC)/primary angle-closure suspected (PACS) in the fellow eye were recruited. The biometric parameters of both the eyes were measured by A-scan ultrasonic biometry and ultrasound biomicroscopy. Comparisons of visual function, baseline intraocular pressure (IOP), and the biometric measurements were made.
RESULTS: Forty-one patients were recruited. Eyes with CPACG had worse visual function, higher baseline IOP, and larger cup-to-disc ratio than their fellow eyes with PAC/PACS (P<0.001). Eyes with CPACG had shallower anterior chamber depths, smaller anterior chamber angles, thinner irises, and longer iris-ciliary process distances than their fellow eyes with PAC/PACS (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in terms of lens thicknesses, axial lengths, lens vault, and trabecular-ciliary process distances.
CONCLUSIONS: Lens thickness, lens location, and axial length do not appear to play a significant role in the progression from PAC/PACS to CPACG. A thin and anterior iris bowing may be related to the progression from PAC/PACS to CPACG.
METHODS: Consecutive patients diagnosed with CPACG in 1 eye and primary angle-closure (PAC)/primary angle-closure suspected (PACS) in the fellow eye were recruited. The biometric parameters of both the eyes were measured by A-scan ultrasonic biometry and ultrasound biomicroscopy. Comparisons of visual function, baseline intraocular pressure (IOP), and the biometric measurements were made.
RESULTS: Forty-one patients were recruited. Eyes with CPACG had worse visual function, higher baseline IOP, and larger cup-to-disc ratio than their fellow eyes with PAC/PACS (P<0.001). Eyes with CPACG had shallower anterior chamber depths, smaller anterior chamber angles, thinner irises, and longer iris-ciliary process distances than their fellow eyes with PAC/PACS (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in terms of lens thicknesses, axial lengths, lens vault, and trabecular-ciliary process distances.
CONCLUSIONS: Lens thickness, lens location, and axial length do not appear to play a significant role in the progression from PAC/PACS to CPACG. A thin and anterior iris bowing may be related to the progression from PAC/PACS to CPACG.