We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
Is there any difference in target intraocular pressure for exfoliative glaucoma patients with cardiovascular disease history?
European Journal of Ophthalmology 2010 November
PURPOSE: To investigate if patients with exfoliation glaucoma (XFG) with cardiovascular disease (CVD) require different target intraocular pressure (IOP) compared to patients with XFG with no CVD for long-term stability.
METHODS: A retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort analysis included consecutive patients with XFG from 9 European academic centers, with a minimum of 5 years follow-up.
RESULTS: In 201 patients, there was a statistical difference between progressed and non-progressed patients in mean (p=0.0049) and peak (p=0.015) IOP, variance of IOP (p=0.028), and number of medicine changes/year (p=0.0037). At a mean IOP ≥22 mmHg, patients progressed in 84% (32/38), between 14 and 21 mmHg in 54% (81/151), and at ≤13 mmHg in 33% (4/12). There was no difference in the rate of progression between groups based on CVD history (p=0.65). However, IOP that allowed ≤50% progression rate for patients with mild or no CVD was ≤20-21 mmHg and ≤18 mmHg for patients with severe disease. Further, at IOP ≥20 mmHg, 8% (1/12) of patients with severe CVD remained stable in contrast to 38% (16/42) of patients with mild and 21% (4/19) with no CVD history (p=0.0093). By multivariant regression analysis of the IOP and CVD measures, mean IOP was a risk factor for progression (p=0.0097).
CONCLUSIONS: Although IOP is the main determinant of progression in XFG under treatment, history of severe CVD should be further investigated as potential risk factor for glaucomatous progression.
METHODS: A retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort analysis included consecutive patients with XFG from 9 European academic centers, with a minimum of 5 years follow-up.
RESULTS: In 201 patients, there was a statistical difference between progressed and non-progressed patients in mean (p=0.0049) and peak (p=0.015) IOP, variance of IOP (p=0.028), and number of medicine changes/year (p=0.0037). At a mean IOP ≥22 mmHg, patients progressed in 84% (32/38), between 14 and 21 mmHg in 54% (81/151), and at ≤13 mmHg in 33% (4/12). There was no difference in the rate of progression between groups based on CVD history (p=0.65). However, IOP that allowed ≤50% progression rate for patients with mild or no CVD was ≤20-21 mmHg and ≤18 mmHg for patients with severe disease. Further, at IOP ≥20 mmHg, 8% (1/12) of patients with severe CVD remained stable in contrast to 38% (16/42) of patients with mild and 21% (4/19) with no CVD history (p=0.0093). By multivariant regression analysis of the IOP and CVD measures, mean IOP was a risk factor for progression (p=0.0097).
CONCLUSIONS: Although IOP is the main determinant of progression in XFG under treatment, history of severe CVD should be further investigated as potential risk factor for glaucomatous progression.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app