METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted on 171 primary angle closure patients (268 eyes). Visual acuity, refraction, and ocular biometry (central anterior chamber depth [ACD], axial length [AL], and lens thickness) were recorded. Vitreous cavity length (VL) and relative lens position (RLP) were calculated.
RESULTS: A total of 92 Primary Angle Closure Suspect (PACS), 30 Primary Angle Closure (PAC), and 146 Primary Angle Closure Glaucoma (PACG) eyes were included. Chinese ethnicity formed the majority (n = 197, 73.5%), followed by Malay (n = 57, 21.3%) and Indian (n = 14, 5.2%). There was a significant female preponderance with a female to male ratio of 1.85. Mean age was 65.7 ± 7.7 years. Mean spherical equivalent was +0.33 ± 1.29 D. Approximately half (n = 137, 51%) of the eyes were hyperopic (spherical power ≥+0.5), with PACG having the highest percentage of hyperopia (n = 69, 50.4%). Myopia and emmetropia were present in 48 (17.9) and 83 (31%) eyes, respectively. Although AL and VL in myopia patients were significantly longer than emmetropic and hyperopic eyes (p < 0.001), the ACD was not significantly different (p = 0.427). While the RLP is smaller in myopic eyes, lens thickness was increased in hyperopic eyes. PACG was significantly higher in elderly patients compared to PACS and PAC (p = 0.005). A total of 37 (13.8%) eyes were blind (vision worse than 3/60) and 19 of them (51.3%) were female patients.
CONCLUSION: A decrease in RLP is predictive of angle closure disease in myopic eyes, whereas increased lens thickness contributes to angle closure disease in hyperopic eyes.
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: This was a prospective non-randomized comparative study. Eyes with OAG and cataracts that were planned for either combined phacoemulsification and iStent implantation (iStent+CS) or phacoemulsification alone (CS) were recruited. The iStent inject (Model G2-M-IS) or iStent injectW (Model G2-W) trabecular micro-bypass stent (Glaukos Corporation, San Clemente, CA, USA) was implanted in the iStent+CS group. WDT was performed before and 3 months after surgery. WDT-IOP parameters including peak IOP, IOP fluctuation, and area under the curve (AUC) were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: There were 20 eyes in the iStent+CS group and 16 eyes in the CS group. Both groups had similar pre-operative baseline IOP (15.6 ± 3.7 mm Hg vs. 15.8 ± 1.8 mm Hg in the iStent+CS and CS group, respectively, p = 0.883). The iStent+CS group experienced greater numerical reduction in peak IOP (2.6 ± 1.9 mm Hg vs. 1.9 ± 2.4 mm Hg; p = 0.355), IOP fluctuation (1.7 ± 2.2 mm Hg vs. 0.8 ± 2.5 mm Hg; p = 0.289), and AUC (54.8 ± 103.6 mm Hg × minute vs. 25.3 ± 79.0 mm Hg × minute; p = 0.355) than the CS group. There was more reduction in the number of anti-glaucoma medications in the iStent+CS group (1.4 ± 1.2) than the CS group (0.3 ± 0.9; p = 0.005).
CONCLUSION: Both combined phacoemulsification with iStent inject implantation and phacoemulsification alone reduced peak IOP, IOP fluctuation, and AUC, and none of these parameters showed statistically significant difference. Greater reduction in anti-glaucoma medications was seen in the combined group.