Search

Background: To present a comprehensive approach for the management of patients with neovascular glaucoma (NVG) aiming to preserve visual function and complement pan-retinal photocoagulation (PRP) by anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment and anti-glaucoma surgery.Methods: This study includes a prospective, interventional case series. A process flow chart for NVG management was designed. Totally 50 patients (51 eyes) with NVG were included. Of these, 43 patients (44 eyes) completed the treatment process. Patients were divided into central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) groups according to their original diagnosis. Intraocular pressure (IOP), visual function, and the status of iris and angle neovascularization were recorded before and after treatment.Results: Patients were followed up for 6-30 months (mean 12.2 months). The IOP of all 44 patients was effectively controlled and was significantly less after treatment (16.68 ± 4.69 mmHg) than before treatment (42.59 ± 9.44 mmHg, P < 0.05). Thirty-nine eyes displayed controlled IOP (≤21 mmHg) after treatment. Visual acuity improved, to some extent, in 32 eyes (72.9 %), and 12 eyes (27.3 %) had a visual acuity better than 0.1. There was no significant difference in IOP between the PDR and CRVO groups at the end of follow-up (P = 0.8657), but the visual acuity in the PDR group was much better than that in the CRVO group (P = 0.0079).Conclusions: A comprehensive therapy for NVG can effectively control IOP and preserve visual function in patients by anti-VEGF injection and anti-glaucoma surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate accuracy of the currently used strategies for intraocular pressure measurements for reflecting actual 24-hour intraocular pressure fluctuations., Methods: From September, 2018 to January, 2019, the patients with a suspected diagnosis of primary open angle glaucoma at our hospital were prospectively enrolled to receive 24-hour intraocular pressure monitoring using a Goldmann tonometer. With the intraocular pressure measurements at 0:00, 2:00, 5:00, 7:00, 8:00, 10:00, 11:00, 14:00, 16:00, 18:00, 20:00, and 22:00 as the gold standard (strategy 1), we compared the measurements taken at 5:00, 7:00, 10:00, 14:00, 18:00, and 22:00 (strategy 2) and at 8:00, 11:00, 14:00, and 16:00 (strategy 3) for their accuracy in reflecting 24-h intraocular pressure fluctuations., Results: A total of 41 patients (82 eyes) were enrolled in this study. The peak intraocular pressures measured using the 3 strategies were 21.09±4.15 mmHg, 20.54±4.10 mmHg, and 19.91±4.38 mmHg, respectively, showing significant differences among them ( P < 0.05). The trough intraocular pressures measured by the 3 strategies were also significantly different (13.93±3.38 mmHg, 14.63±3.49 mmHg, and 15.46±3.63 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.05). The co-occurrence of the peak intraocular pressure was 74.39% between strategies 1 and 2 and 43.90% between strategies 1 and 3. The sensitivity of strategies 2 and 3 for detecting 24-h intraocular pressure fluctuations was 55.56% and 36.11%, respectively., Conclusions: For suspected cases of glaucoma, intraocular pressure measurements at 4 and 6 time points of a day can not precisely reflect the actual range of intraocular pressure fluctuations, and may lead to a missed diagnosis of glaucoma.

Objective: To investigate the theoretical basis and practical limitations of the existing calculation formulas in the evaluation of ametropic state., Methods: The evaluation indicators and their calculation parameters of ametropia were analyzed by using the reduced schematic model eye, the paraxial imaging principle, and the dimension laws., Results: The existing formulas resulted from the reduced object vergence of object distance and image distance relation. Regarding the two measurement indicators of the existing formulas, diopter was misused for refractive power. "Ametropia degree" was a non-standard diction. Both of them were not suitable as the evaluation indicators. The outcomes of the existing formulas and their related plus or minus sign rules showed refractive corrections instead of refractive errors proper. For refractive errors, there was no suitable evaluation indicator., Conclusions: In the evaluation of ametropic state, there are fundamental problems in the existing formulas resulting from the reduced object vergence. The measurement indicators and their dimensional units are confused and misused. The calculation results refer to the refractive corrections only. The evaluation indicators for ametropia need to be further discussed.

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of ab interno trabeculectomy (Trabectome) surgery in Chinese open angle glaucoma patients., Methods: Prospective non-comparative case series study. A total of 41 cases (34 primary open angle glaucoma patients, 3 developmental glaucoma patients and 4 pigmentary glaucoma patients) were included in the study. All the cases underwent Trabectome, including 9 cases combined with phacoemulsification cataract extraction. Major outcomes include intraocular pressure (IOP), number of glaucoma medications, secondary glaucoma surgery and postoperative complications. Criteria for successful operation were defined as IOP ≤ 21 mmHg (1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa), at least 20% IOP reduction in any two consecutive visits after 3 months with or without IOP-lowering drugs and no additional glaucoma surgery. IOP and number of glaucoma medications were compared to baseline using Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni correction. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to analyze the success rate of surgery., Results: In the all 41 patients, 21 cases (51.2%) were followed up for up to 12 months. IOP was reduced from (22.5 ± 8.1) mmHg to (17.6 ± 6.4) mmHg (P = 0.02), meanwhile number of glaucoma medications was reduced from 2.0 ± 0.9 to 1.2 ± 0.9 (P = 0.02) at 12 months. The success rate at one year was 85% and 4 cases required additional glaucoma surgery., Conclusions: Trabectome has many advantages, such as shorter surgery time, simple post-operative care, less intraoperative and postoperative complications and clear IOP-lowering effect. But it slong-term efficacy is still need a large sample, long-term follow-up to verify.