Search

Your search keyword '"Jay Katz L"' showing total 21 results
Start Over Author "Jay Katz L"
21 results on '"Jay Katz L"'

2. A Proposal for the Use of a Fixed Low Energy SLT for Open Angle Glaucoma

Author

Zachary, Sacks, primary, Jay, Katz L., additional, Gus, Gazzard, additional, Van Tassel, Sarah H., additional, Blumenthal, Eytan Z., additional, Fabian, Lerner S., additional, Azuara-Blanco, Augusto, additional, Spooner, Gregory John Roy, additional, Solberg, Yoram, additional, Samuelson, Thomas, additional, and Michael, Belkin, additional

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

7. Comparing glaucomatous disc change using stereo disc viewing and the MatchedFlicker programme in glaucoma experts and trainees

Author

Schaefer, Jamie L, primary, Meyer, Alissa M, additional, Rodgers, Cooper D, additional, Rosenberg, Nicole C, additional, Leoncavallo, Anthony J, additional, Lukowski, Zachary L, additional, Greer, Anthony B, additional, Martorana, Gina M, additional, Zou, Baiming, additional, Shuster, Jonathan J, additional, Jay Katz, L, additional, Schuman, Joel S, additional, Kass, Michael A, additional, and Sherwood, Mark B, additional

Published
2017
Full Text
View/download PDF

8. Comparing glaucomatous disc change using stereo disc viewing and the MatchedFlicker programme in glaucoma experts and trainees

Author

Schaefer, Jamie L, Meyer, Alissa M, Rodgers, Cooper D, Rosenberg, Nicole C, Leoncavallo, Anthony J, Lukowski, Zachary L, Greer, Anthony B, Martorana, Gina M, Zou, Baiming, Shuster, Jonathan J, Jay Katz, L, Schuman, Joel S, Kass, Michael A, and Sherwood, Mark B

Abstract

Background/aimsThe objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy and speed of trainees and experienced glaucoma specialists using the MatchedFlicker software against the manual examination of stereoscopic disc photographs for detecting glaucomatous optic disc change.MethodsThree experienced glaucoma specialists, two resident ophthalmologists and one glaucoma fellow from multiple institutions independently evaluated the same 140 image pairs from 100 glaucomatous/ocular hypertensive eyes using a handheld stereo viewer and the MatchedFlicker programme. Fifty had progression to glaucoma as determined by the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS) Optic Disc Reading Group and endpoint committee, and 50 more were negative controls for progression with photos taken a few minutes apart. Twenty photo pairs from each of the two groups were duplicated for reviewer variability analysis. The initial viewing method was randomised and then alternated for each group of 70 image pairs. Reviewer accuracy and evaluation time for each method were measured.ResultsEvaluators averaged 8.6 s faster per image pair (26%) with the MatchedFlicker programme than with the stereo viewer (p=0.0007). Evaluators correctly identified more image pairs when using the MatchedFlicker software over the stereo viewer (p=0.0003). There was no significant difference between the expert and trainee group in speed or overall accuracy for either method. Experts were significantly more consistent than trainees with the duplicate image pairs (p=0.029). Trainees appeared more reluctant to designate eyes as showing glaucoma progression than experts.ConclusionsBoth expert glaucoma specialists and ophthalmologists in various stages of training had greater accuracy and speed with the MatchedFlicker programme than with a handheld stereoscopic viewer.

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

13. Analysis of 13 cell types reveals evidence for the expression of numerous novel primate- and tissue-specific microRNAs.

Author

Londin, Eric, Loher, Phillipe, Telonis, Aristeidis G., Quann, Kevin, Clark, Peter, Yi Jing, Hatzimichael, Eleftheria, Yohei Kirino, Shozo Honda, Lally, Michelle, Ramratnam, Bharat, Comstock, Clay E. S., Knudsen, Karen E., Gomella, Leonard, Spaeth, George L., Hark, Lisa, Jay Katz, L., Witkiewicz, Agnieszka, Rostami, Abdolmohamad, and Jimenez, Sergio A.

Subjects
MICRORNA, RNA, HAPLOIDY, PLOIDY, GENOMES
Abstract

Two decades after the discovery of the first animal microRNA (miRNA), the number of miRNAs in animal genomes remains a vexing question. Here, we report findings from analyzing 1,323 short RNA sequencing samples (RNA-seq) from 13 different human tissue types. Using stringent thresholding criteria, we identified 3,707 statistically significant novel mature miRNAs at a false discovery rate of ≤0.05 arising from 3,494 novel precursors; 91.5%of these novel miRNAs were identified independently in 10 or more of the processed samples. Analysis of these novel miRNAs revealed tissue-specific dependencies and a commensurate low Jaccard similarity index in intertissue comparisons. Of these novel miRNAs, 1,657 (45%)were identified in 43 datasets that were generated by cross-linking followed by Argonaute immunoprecipitation and sequencing (Ago CLIP-seq) and represented 3 of the 13 tissues, indicating that thesemiRNAs are active in the RNA interference pathway. Moreover, experimental investigation through stemloop PCR of a random collection of newly discovered miRNAs in 12 cell lines representing 5 tissues confirmed their presence and tissue dependence. Among the newly identified miRNAs are many novel miRNA clusters, new members of known miRNA clusters, previously unreported products from uncharacterized arms of miRNA precursors, and previously unrecognized paralogues of functionally important miRNA families (e.g., miR-15/107). Examination of the sequence conservation across vertebrate and invertebrate organisms showed 56.7% of the newly discovered miRNAs to be human-specific whereas the majority (94.4%) are primate lineage-specific. Our findings suggest that the repertoire of human miRNAs is far more extensive than currently represented by public repositories and that there is a significant number of lineage- and/or tissue-specific miRNAs that are uncharacterized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

14. A comparison of methods used to evaluate mobility performance in the visually impaired.

Author

Warrian, Kevin J., Jay Katz, L., Myers, Jonathan S., Moster, Marlene R., Pro, Michael J., Wizov, Sheryl S., and Spaeth, George L.

Subjects
*MOBILITY of people with visual disabilities, *GLAUCOMA, *RETINAL degeneration, *DIABETIC retinopathy, *TASK performance
Abstract

Purpose To compare three different approaches to measuring mobility performance when evaluating the visually impaired. Methods 488 participants, including 192 glaucoma, 112 age-related macular degeneration, 91 diabetic retinopathy and 93 healthy volunteers, completed the Assessment of Disability Related to Vision (ADREV) mobility course. The performance of participants on the mobility course was evaluated by noting errors made and time required for completion. Errors noted and time taken were compared using multivariate logistic regression to determine which measurement better differentiated patients with visual disease from healthy volunteers. Multivariate logistic regression was also used to evaluate the combined metric of ADREV errors divided by time to determine its ability to discriminate participants with visual disease from healthy volunteers. Results Errors noted and time taken while ambulating through the standardised mobility course shared a weak but statistically significant association (Pearson's r=0.36, p<0.05). After controlling for demographic and medical comorbidities, logistic regression analysis revealed that errors noted were better at discriminating individuals with visual disease from healthy volunteers (OR 2.8-4.9, 95% CI 1.5 to 10.3) compared with the time taken for mobility course completion (OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.2). These findings were consistent across all comparisons between healthy volunteers and participants with each type of visual impairment. Finally, the combined metric of ADREV errors divided by time was far more predictive of visual disease compared with either time taken or errors noted during mobility testing (OR 11.0-17.7, 95% CI 3.6 to 77.1). Conclusions A validated scoring system based on errors is more effective when assessing visual disability during mobility testing than recording the time taken for course completion. The combined metric of ADREV errors noted divided by time taken was most predictive of all the methods used to evaluate visual disability during mobility testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

18. LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

Author

Acosta, Jorge, Albis-Donado, Oscar, Alencar, Luciana M, Rand Allingham, R, Anand, Nitin, Asota, Ijeoma M, Yu Astakhov, Sergey, Astakhov, Yury S, Babic, Mirko, Baerveldt, George, Bansal, Rajendra K, Barton, Keith, Baudouin, Christophe, Bazzaz, Sheila, Beck, Allen, Bennett, Sonya L, Berke, Stanley J, Berlin, Michael S, Bevin, Tui H, Bloom, Philip A, Bollinger, Kathryn E, Bowd, Christopher, Boyle, John W, IV, Brandt, James D, Broadway, David C, Brocchini, Stephen, Bron, Alain M, Budenz, Donald L, Bull, Natalie D, Bunce, Catey, Burgoyne, Claude F, Buys, Yvonne M, Cantor, Louis B, Caprioli, Joseph, Carassa, Roberto G, Casper, Daniel S, Catoira-Boyle, Yara PM, Ceruti, Piero, Chakrabarti, Debasis, Chakrabarti, Raka (Chatterjee), Challa, Pratap, Chang, Peter T, Chiang, Mark Y-M, Choplin, Neil T, Cioffi, George A, Coleman, Anne L, Congdon, Nathan G, Coote, Michael A, Costa, Vital P, Crabb, David P, Randy Craven, E, Crowston, Jonathan G, Dahan, Elie, Dahlmann-Noor, Annegret H, de Lima, Ricardo, Diamond, Jeremy P, Dorairaj, Syril K, Doshi, Amish, Crawford Downs, J, El Mallah, Mohammed K, ElSayyad, Fathi F, Esson, Douglas W, Fantes, Francisco, Fechter, Herbert P, III, Fechtner, Robert D, Fellman, Ronald L, Fernando, Arosha, Fisher, Ann Caroline, Fitzke, Frederick W, Flammer, Josef, Fortune, Brad, Foster, Paul J, Freedman, Jeffrey, Gandolfi, Stefano A, Garway-Heath, David (Ted), Gazzard, Gus, Gedde, Steven J, Georgoulas, Stelios, Goldberg, Ivan, Graham, Stuart L, Grajewski, Alana, Greenfield, David S, Grehn, Franz, Grigera, Daniel E, Gross, Ronald L, Gupta, Meenakashi, Haefliger, Ivan O, Hafez, Ali S, Hawker, Matthew J, Healey, Paul R, Heatley, Catherine J, Heuer, Dale K, Higginbotham, Eve J, Hitchings, Roger A, Holló, Gábor, Hoste, Ann M, Hylton, Camille, Johnson, Thomas V, Jonas, Jost B, Kahook, Malik Y, Kass, Michael A, Jay Katz, L, Keeffe, Jill E, Tee Khaw, Peng, Khouri, Albert S, Kim, Danny, Klink, Thomas, Konstas, Anastasios GP, Kotecha, Aachal, Krupin, Theodore, Kulkarni, Avinash, Labbé, Antoine, Labbe, Thad, Lacey, Alan, Lam, Dennis SC, Lee, Graham, Lee, Paul P, Lemij, Hans G, Fabian Lerner, S, Lesk, Mark R, Levin, Leonard A, Lewis, Richard A, Lichter, Paul R, Liebmann, Jeffrey M, Sheng Lim, K, Lim, Ridia, Low, Sancy, Mandal, Anil K, Marchini, Giorgio, Martin, Belen, Martin, Keith R, Matchar, David B, McKinley, Steven H, McKinnon, Stuart J, Medeiros, Felipe A, Mermoud, André, Mérula, Rafael V, Meyers, Toni T, Migdal, Clive S, Mikropoulos, Dimitrios G, Minckler, Don, Molteno, Anthony CB, Mora, Paolo, Moreno-Montañés, Javier, Morgan, James E, Muñoz-Negrete, Francisco J, Myers, Jonathan S, Neelakantan, Arvind, Negi, Anil K, Netland, Peter A, Nicolela, Marcelo T, Nofal, Magdy A, Nolan, Winifred, Noureddin, Baha' N, Papadopoulos, Maria, Parikh, Rajul S, Parrish, Richard K, II, Pfeiffer, Norbert, Piltz-Seymour, Jody, Quigley, Harry A, Quinn, Carolyn D, Ramulu, Pradeep Y, Realini, Anthony, Rebolleda, Gema, Reus, Nicolaas J, Reynolds, Adam C, Rhee, Douglas J, Ritch, Robert, Roberts, Cynthia J, Roberts, Michael D, Robin, Alan L, RojanaPongpun, Prin, Roy, Sylvain, Ru, Qian, Salmon, John F, Sampaolesi, Juan Roberto, Sangermani, Chiara, Sarodia, Usman A, Schlötzer-Schrehardt, Ursula, Schnyder, Corinne C, Schultz, Gregory S, Schuman, Joel S, Schwartz, Gail F, Shaarawy, Tarek M, Shah, Peter, Sheets, Clinton W, Sherwood, Mark B, Oto Shiroma, Lineu, Shuba, Lesya M, Singh, Annapurna, Singh, Arun D, Singh, Kuldev, Spaeth, George L, Spratt, Alexander, Stalmans, Ingeborg, Stamper, Robert L, Stewart, William C, Susanna, Remo, Jr, Tamm, Ernst R, Tanna, Angelo P, Teekhasaenee, Chaiwat, Tello, Celso, Tham, Clement CY, Thieme, Hagen, Thomas, Ravi, Thompson, Andrew M, Thulasiraj, Ravilla D, Thygesen, John, Tomey, Karim, Toris, Carol B, Tosi, Roberto, Tsai, James C, Tuli, Sonal S, Tuulonen, Anja, Uhler, Tara A, Ungaro, Nicola, Michael Van Buskirk, E, van Koolwijk, Leonieke ME, Vernon, Stephen A, Vessani, Roberto M, Viswanathan, Ananth C, Weinreb, Robert, Wells, Anthony, Werner, Mark, Wiafe, Boateng, Wilensky, Jacob T, Windisch, Bettina K, Wong, Tina, WuDunn, Darrell, Yip, Jennifer LY, Zangwill, Linda M, Zanutigh, Virginia E, Zeyen, Thierry, and Zimmerman, Thom J

Full Text
View/download PDF

19. LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

Author

Acosta, Jorge, Albis-Donado, Oscar, Alencar, Luciana M, Rand Allingham, R, Anand, Nitin, Asota, Ijeoma M, Yu Astakhov, Sergey, Astakhov, Yury S, Babic, Mirko, Baerveldt, George, Bansal, Rajendra K, Barton, Keith, Baudouin, Christophe, Bazzaz, Sheila, Beck, Allen, Bennett, Sonya L, Berke, Stanley J, Berlin, Michael S, Bevin, Tui H, Bloom, Philip A, Bollinger, Kathryn E, Bowd, Christopher, Boyle, John W, IV, Brandt, James D, Broadway, David C, Brocchini, Stephen, Bron, Alain M, Budenz, Donald L, Bull, Natalie D, Bunce, Catey, Burgoyne, Claude F, Buys, Yvonne M, Cantor, Louis B, Caprioli, Joseph, Carassa, Roberto G, Casper, Daniel S, Catoira-Boyle, Yara PM, Ceruti, Piero, Chakrabarti, Debasis, Chakrabarti, Raka (Chatterjee), Challa, Pratap, Chang, Peter T, Chiang, Mark Y-M, Choplin, Neil T, Cioffi, George A, Coleman, Anne L, Congdon, Nathan G, Coote, Michael A, Costa, Vital P, Crabb, David P, Randy Craven, E, Crowston, Jonathan G, Dahan, Elie, Dahlmann-Noor, Annegret H, de Lima, Ricardo, Diamond, Jeremy P, Dorairaj, Syril K, Doshi, Amish, Crawford Downs, J, El Mallah, Mohammed K, ElSayyad, Fathi F, Esson, Douglas W, Fantes, Francisco, Fechter, Herbert P, III, Fechtner, Robert D, Fellman, Ronald L, Fernando, Arosha, Fisher, Ann Caroline, Fitzke, Frederick W, Flammer, Josef, Fortune, Brad, Foster, Paul J, Freedman, Jeffrey, Gandolfi, Stefano A, Garway-Heath, David (Ted), Gazzard, Gus, Gedde, Steven J, Georgoulas, Stelios, Goldberg, Ivan, Graham, Stuart L, Grajewski, Alana, Greenfield, David S, Grehn, Franz, Grigera, Daniel E, Gross, Ronald L, Gupta, Meenakashi, Haefliger, Ivan O, Hafez, Ali S, Hawker, Matthew J, Healey, Paul R, Heatley, Catherine J, Heuer, Dale K, Higginbotham, Eve J, Hitchings, Roger A, Holló, Gábor, Hoste, Ann M, Hylton, Camille, Johnson, Thomas V, Jonas, Jost B, Kahook, Malik Y, Kass, Michael A, Jay Katz, L, Keeffe, Jill E, Tee Khaw, Peng, Khouri, Albert S, Kim, Danny, Klink, Thomas, Konstas, Anastasios GP, Kotecha, Aachal, Krupin, Theodore, Kulkarni, Avinash, Labbé, Antoine, Labbe, Thad, Lacey, Alan, Lam, Dennis SC, Lee, Graham, Lee, Paul P, Lemij, Hans G, Fabian Lerner, S, Lesk, Mark R, Levin, Leonard A, Lewis, Richard A, Lichter, Paul R, Liebmann, Jeffrey M, Sheng Lim, K, Lim, Ridia, Low, Sancy, Mandal, Anil K, Marchini, Giorgio, Martin, Belen, Martin, Keith R, Matchar, David B, McKinley, Steven H, McKinnon, Stuart J, Medeiros, Felipe A, Mermoud, André, Mérula, Rafael V, Meyers, Toni T, Migdal, Clive S, Mikropoulos, Dimitrios G, Minckler, Don, Molteno, Anthony CB, Mora, Paolo, Moreno-Montañés, Javier, Morgan, James E, Muñoz-Negrete, Francisco J, Myers, Jonathan S, Neelakantan, Arvind, Negi, Anil K, Netland, Peter A, Nicolela, Marcelo T, Nofal, Magdy A, Nolan, Winifred, Noureddin, Baha' N, Papadopoulos, Maria, Parikh, Rajul S, Parrish, Richard K, II, Pfeiffer, Norbert, Piltz-Seymour, Jody, Quigley, Harry A, Quinn, Carolyn D, Ramulu, Pradeep Y, Realini, Anthony, Rebolleda, Gema, Reus, Nicolaas J, Reynolds, Adam C, Rhee, Douglas J, Ritch, Robert, Roberts, Cynthia J, Roberts, Michael D, Robin, Alan L, RojanaPongpun, Prin, Roy, Sylvain, Ru, Qian, Salmon, John F, Sampaolesi, Juan Roberto, Sangermani, Chiara, Sarodia, Usman A, Schlötzer-Schrehardt, Ursula, Schnyder, Corinne C, Schultz, Gregory S, Schuman, Joel S, Schwartz, Gail F, Shaarawy, Tarek M, Shah, Peter, Sheets, Clinton W, Sherwood, Mark B, Oto Shiroma, Lineu, Shuba, Lesya M, Singh, Annapurna, Singh, Arun D, Singh, Kuldev, Spaeth, George L, Spratt, Alexander, Stalmans, Ingeborg, Stamper, Robert L, Stewart, William C, Susanna, Remo, Jr, Tamm, Ernst R, Tanna, Angelo P, Teekhasaenee, Chaiwat, Tello, Celso, Tham, Clement CY, Thieme, Hagen, Thomas, Ravi, Thompson, Andrew M, Thulasiraj, Ravilla D, Thygesen, John, Tomey, Karim, Toris, Carol B, Tosi, Roberto, Tsai, James C, Tuli, Sonal S, Tuulonen, Anja, Uhler, Tara A, Ungaro, Nicola, Michael Van Buskirk, E, van Koolwijk, Leonieke ME, Vernon, Stephen A, Vessani, Roberto M, Viswanathan, Ananth C, Weinreb, Robert, Wells, Anthony, Werner, Mark, Wiafe, Boateng, Wilensky, Jacob T, Windisch, Bettina K, Wong, Tina, WuDunn, Darrell, Yip, Jennifer LY, Zangwill, Linda M, Zanutigh, Virginia E, Zeyen, Thierry, and Zimmerman, Thom J

Full Text
View/download PDF

20. Contemporary Approach to Narrow Angles.

Author

Shamseldin Shalaby W, Reddy R, Razeghinejad R, and Jay Katz L

Abstract

Glaucoma is the leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide. Among all glaucoma types, primary angle closure glaucoma (PACG) affects approximately 23 million people worldwide, and is responsible for 50% of glaucoma-related blindness, highlighting the devastating consequences of this disease. The main mechanism of PACG is relative pupillary block. High-risk populations are female gender, Asian ethnicity, high hyperopia, short axial length, and a thick/anteriorly positioned lens. This review discusses the clinical diagnosis, classification, and management of patients with a narrow angle with and without intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation and glaucomatous optic nerve damage, including laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI), endocycloplasty (ECPL), lens extraction, and goniosynechialysis., Competing Interests: None., (Copyright © 2024 Shalaby et al.)

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

21. Effect of Phacoemulsification on Intraocular Pressure in Eyes with Functioning Tube Shunts.

Author

Shamseldin Shalaby W, Patel S, S Lam S, Ganjei A, Garg Shukla A, Kolomeyer N, Lee D, Jay Katz L, R Moster M, Myers J, and Razeghinejad R

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of phacoemulsification on intraocular pressure (IOP) in eyes with functioning tube shunts., Methods: This was a retrospective chart review of primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) patients with a functioning tube who underwent phacoemulsification and had ≥ 24 months of follow-up. The primary end point was defined as surgical failure (IOP > 21 mmHg) at month 24, progression to no light perception (NLP) vision, glaucoma reoperation, or implant removal. Surgical failure defined as IOP > 18 and > 15 mmHg, changes in visual acuity (VA), IOP, and number of medications were assessed., Results: Twenty-seven eyes of 27 patients with moderate or severe POAG were included. The mean age of the patients was 64.2 ± 10.8 years. The interval between the tube shunt and phacoemulsification was 28.8 ± 25.0 months. At the end of the study, four (14.8%) eyes met the failure criteria; the average time to failure was 9.3 ± 3.8 months. The causes of failure were high IOP in two (50.0%) and glaucoma reoperation in two (50.0%) eyes; however, no eyes progressed to NLP vision. Surgical failure defined as IOP > 18 and > 15 mmHg showed an increasing failure rate (18.5% and 48.5%, respectively).Themean IOP and medications number remained stable at month 24 compared to baseline ( P = 0.131 and P = 0.302, respectively). Initially, VA showed improvement, with the greatest improvement at 6 months ( P = 0.001), but at 24 months the improvement was no longer significant ( P = 0.430)., Conclusion: Phacoemulsification in patients with functioning tubes did not change the mean IOP in most of the patients (86.2%); the number of medications also did not increase., Competing Interests: None., (Copyright © 2023 Shalaby et al.)

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results