Acta Scientific Ophthalmology (ISSN: 2582-3191)

Research Article Volume 3 Issue 10

How Often Should Healthy Optic Nerves be Scanned for the Development of Glaucomatous Optic Neuropathy?

Paul Varner*

John J Pershing VAMC, USA

*Corresponding Author: Paul Varner, John J Pershing VAMC, USA.

Received: September 14, 2020; Published: September 23, 2020

×

Abstract

Background: No data exist for the time period required for the conversion of healthy optic nerves to glaucomatous optic neuropathy (GON). It is not possible to predict which patients will develop glaucoma. Periodic screening of ONHs via nerve fiber layer (NFL) scans might allow for the early detection of GON.

Method: Retrospective chart review of patients who developed definitive unilateral (n = 18) or bilateral (n = 13) glaucoma to determine time course for conversion to/discovery of GON, as corroborated by optic nerve head (ONH) evaluation, NFL scans, and automated visual field (VF) perimetry.

Results: Median time of conversion for this cohort was 7 years for unilateral and 8 years for bilateral GON.

Conclusion: Screening ONHs/NFL at five-year intervals may be adequate for the detection of new cases of GON in its early stages.

Keywords: Glaucoma; Nerve Fiber Layer; Screening Frequency

×

References

  1. McKinnon SJ. “Glaucoma, apoptosis, and neuroprotection”. Current Opinion in Ophthalmology 8 (1997): 28-37.
  2. Fortune B., et al. “Relating Retinal Ganglion Cell Function and Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer (RNFL) Retardance to Progressive Loss of RNFL Thickness and Optic Nerve Axons in Experimental Glaucoma”. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science 56 (2015): 3936-3944.
  3. Chen CL., et al. “Peripapillary Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Vascular Microcirculation in Eyes With Glaucoma and Single-Hemifield Visual Field Loss”. JAMA Ophthalmology 135 (2017): 461-468.
  4. World Health Organization. “Blindness and Vision Impairment” (2019).
  5. Tham Y-C., et al. “Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. Ophthalmology 121 (2014): 2081-2090.
  6. Rein DB., et al. “The economic burden of major adult visual disorders in the United States”. Archives of Ophthalmology 124 (2006): 1754-1760.
  7. Traverso CE., et al. “Direct costs of glaucoma and severity of the disease: a multinational long term study of resource utilisation in Europe”. British Journal of Ophthalmology 89 (2005): 1245-1249.
  8. Varma, R., et al. “An Assessment of the Health and Economic Burdens of Glaucoma”. American Journal of Ophthalmology 152 (2011): 515-522.
  9. Tanito M., et al. “Differentiation of glaucomatous optic discs with different appearances using optic disc topography parameters: The Glaucoma Stereo Analysis Study”. PLoS ONE 12 (2017): e0169858.
  10. Quigley HA. “New paradigms in the mechanisms and management of glaucoma”. Eye 19 (2005): 1241-1248.
  11. Jonas JB., et al. “Ranking of optic disc variables for detection of glaucomatous optic nerve damage”. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science 41 (2000): 1764-1773.
  12. Jonas JB and Schiro D. “Localised wedge shaped defects of the retinal nerve fibre layer in glaucoma”. British Journal of Ophthalmology 78 (1994): 285-290.
  13. Jonas JB., et al. “Optic disc, cup and neuroretinal rim size, configuration and correlations in normal eyes”. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science 29 (1988): 1151-1158.
  14. Tielsch JM., et al. “Intraobserver and interobserver agreement in measurement of optic disc characteristics”. Ophthalmology 95 (1988): 350-356.
  15. Sturmer J., et al. “Intra- and inter-observer variation of optic nerve head measurements in glaucoma suspects using disc-data”. International Ophthalmology 16 (1992): 227-233.
  16. Coleman AL., et al. “Interobserver and intraobserver variability in the detection of glaucomatous progression of the optic disc”. Journal of Glaucoma 5 (1996): 384-389.
  17. Azuara-Blanco A., et al. “Detection of changes of the optic disc in glaucomatous eyes: clinical examination and image analysis with the Topcon Imagenet system”. Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica 78 (2000): 647-650.
  18. Harper R., et al. “Observer variability in optic disc assessment: implications for glaucoma shared care”. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics 20 (2000): 265-273.
  19. Guedes V., et al. “Optical coherence tomography measurement of macular and nerve fiber layer thickness in normal and glaucomatous human eyes”. Ophthalmology 110 (2003): 177-189.
  20. Jonas JB and Schiro D. “Localised wedge shaped defects of the retinal nerve fibre layer in glaucoma”. British Journal of Ophthalmology 78 (1994): 285-290.
  21. Sommer A., et al. “Clinically detectable nerve fiber atrophy precedes the onset of glaucomatous field loss”. Archives of Ophthalmology 109 (1991): 77-83.
  22. Alasil T., et al. “Correlation of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness and visual fields in glaucoma: a broken stick model”. American Journal of Ophthalmology 157 (2014): 953-959.
  23. Leung CK., et al. “Retinal nerve fiber layer imaging with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography: a prospective analysis of age-related loss”. Ophthalmology 119 (2012): 731-737.
  24. Garway-Heath DF., et al. “Aging changes of the optic nerve head in relation to open angle glaucoma”. British Journal of Ophthalmology 81 (1997): 840-845.
  25. Moya FJ., et al. “Effect of aging on optic nerve appearance: a longitudinal study”. British Journal of Ophthalmology 83 (1999): 567-572.
  26. Tuck MW and Crick RP. “The age distribution of primary open angle glaucoma”. Ophthalmic Epidemiology 5 (1998): 173-183.
  27. American Academy of Ophthalmology. Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma: Epidemiology (2013).
  28. Khazaeni B and Khazaeni L. “Acute Closed Angle Glaucoma”. Treasure Island (FL): Stat Pearls Publishing. E-Book (2020).
  29. Scheie HG and Cameron JD. “Pigment dispersion syndrome: a clinical study”. British Journal of Ophthalmology 65 (1981): 264-269.
  30. Siddiqui Y., et al. “What is the risk of developing pigmentary glaucoma from pigment dispersion syndrome?” American Journal of Ophthalmology 135 (2003): 794-799.
  31. Ajita KO., et al. “Survey of Traumatic Glaucoma in a Tertiary Hospital”. Journal of Trauma and Treatment 6 (2017): 1.
  32. Karger RA., et al. “Estimated incidence of pseudoexfoliation syndrome and pseudoexfoliation glaucoma in Olmsted County, Minnesota”. Journal of Glaucoma 12 (2003): 193-197.
  33. Plateroti P., et al. “Pseudoexfoliation Syndrome and Pseudoexfoliation Glaucoma: A Review of the Literature with Updates on Surgical Management”. Journal of Ophthalmology (2015): 370371.
  34. Siddique SS., et al. “Glaucoma and uveitis”. Survey of Ophthalmology 58 (2013): 1-10.
  35. Wilson JMG and Jungner G. “Principles and practice of screening for disease. Geneva: World Health Organization; Public Health Papers 34 (1968).
  36. Dobrow MJ., et al. “Consolidated principles for screening based on a systematic review and consensus process”. Canadian Medical Association Journal 190 (2018): E422-E429.
  37. Gondal TM., et al. “Accuracy of the retinal nerve fiber layer measurements by Stratus optical coherence tomography for perimetric glaucoma”. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan 21 (2011): 749-752.
  38. Wu H., et al. “Diagnostic capability of spectral-domain optical coherence tomography for glaucoma”. American Journal of Ophthalmology 153 (2012): 815-826.
  39. Zhang X., et al. “Comparison of Glaucoma Progression Detection by Optical Coherence Tomography and Visual Field”. American Journal of Ophthalmology 184 (2017): 63-74.
  40. Wu H., et al. “Reproducibility of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness measurements using spectral domain optical coherence tomography”. Journal of Glaucoma 20 (2011): 470-476.
  41. Heijl A., et al. “Rates of visual field progression in clinical glaucoma care”. Acta Ophthalmologica 91 (2013): 406-412.
  42. Quigley HA., et al. “Rate of progression in open-angle glaucoma estimated from cross-sectional prevalence of visual field damage”. American Journal of Ophthalmology 122 (1996): 355-363.
  43. Leske MC., et al. “Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the early manifest glaucoma trial”. Archives of Ophthalmology 121 (2003): 48-56.
  44. Musch DC., et al. “Visual field progression in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study: the impact of treatment and other baseline factors”. Ophthalmology 116 (2009): 200-207.
  45. De Moraes CG., et al. “Visual field progression outcomes in glaucoma subtypes”. Acta Ophthalmologica 91 (2013): 288-293.
  46. Din NM., et al. “Difference in glaucoma progression between the first and second eye after consecutive bilateral glaucoma surgery in patients with bilateral uveitic glaucoma”. Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology 254 (2016): 2439-2448.
  47. Sharon Y., et al. “Uveitic glaucoma: long-term clinical outcome and risk factors for progression”. Ocular Immunology and Inflammation 25 (2017): 740-747.
  48. Ng DS., et al. “Angle-recession glaucoma: long-term clinical outcomes over a 10-year period in traumatic microhyphema”. International Ophthalmology 35 (2015): 107-113.
  49. Kass MA., et al. “The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: a randomized trial determines that topical ocular hypotensive medication delays or prevents the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma”. Archives of Ophthalmology 120 (2002): 701-713.
  50. European Glaucoma Prevention Study (EGPS) Group. “Results of the European Glaucoma Prevention Study”. Ophthalmology 112 (2005): 366-375.
  51. Prum BE., et al. “Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Suspect Preferred Practice Pattern(®) Guidelines”. Ophthalmology 123 (2016): 112-151.
  52. Ahmad SS. “Glaucoma suspects: a practical approach”. Taiwan Journal of Ophthalmology 8 (2018): 74-81.
  53. Gradle HS. “Preglaucoma”. American Journal of Ophthalmology 29 (1946): 520-523.
  54. Chang RT and Singh K. “Glaucoma suspect: diagnosis and management”. The Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology 5 (2016): 32-37.
  55. Etienne R. “Unilateral glaucoma”. British Journal of Ophthalmology 56 (1972): 254-258.
  56. Sangawe JL. “Unilateral Glaucoma”. Tropical and Geographical Medicine 38 (1986): 70-72.
×

Citation

Citation: Paul Varner. “How Often Should Healthy Optic Nerves be Scanned for the Development of Glaucomatous Optic Neuropathy?". Acta Scientific Paediatrics 3.10 (2020): 20-27.




Metrics

Acceptance rate35%
Acceptance to publication20-30 days
ISI- IF1.042
JCR- IF0.24

Indexed In




News and Events


  • Certification for Review
    Acta Scientific certifies the Editors/reviewers for their review done towards the assigned articles of the respective journals.
  • Submission Timeline for Upcoming Issue
    The last date for submission of articles for regular Issues is May 25, 2022.
  • Publication Certificate
    Authors will be issued a "Publication Certificate" as a mark of appreciation for publishing their work.
  • Best Article of the Issue
    The Editors will elect one Best Article after each issue release. The authors of this article will be provided with a certificate of “Best Article of the Issue”.
  • Welcoming Article Submission
    Acta Scientific delightfully welcomes active researchers for submission of articles towards the upcoming issue of respective journals.
  • Contact US