PURPOSE: Comparison of anterior chamber angle measurements using ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM) and gonioscopy. METHODS: Five hundred subjects were evaluated for grading of angle width by the Shaffer method. UBM was done in the same group to document angle width, angle opening distance (AOD 500), and anterior chamber depth. Biometric parameters were documented in all subjects. UBM and gonioscopic findings were compared. RESULTS: A study was conducted in 282 men and 218 women with a mean age of 57.32 +/- 12.48 years. Gonioscopic grading was used to segregate occludable (slit-like, grades 1 and 2) from nonoccludable (grades 3 and 4) angles. Subjective assessment by gonioscopy resulted in an overestimation of angle width within the occludable group when compared with values obtained by UBM. This did not affect the segregation of occludable versus nonoccludable angles by gonioscopy. Biometric parameters in eyes with occludable angles were significantly lower in comparison with eyes with nonoccludable angles, except for lens thickness. AOD 500 correlated well with angle width. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that clinical segregation into occludable and nonoccludable angles by an experienced observer using gonioscopy is fairly accurate. However, UBM is required for objective quantification of angles, and AOD 500 can be a reliable and standard parameter to grade angle width.
PURPOSE: Comparison of anterior chamber angle measurements using ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM) and gonioscopy. METHODS: Five hundred subjects were evaluated for grading of angle width by the Shaffer method. UBM was done in the same group to document angle width, angle opening distance (AOD 500), and anterior chamber depth. Biometric parameters were documented in all subjects. UBM and gonioscopic findings were compared. RESULTS: A study was conducted in 282 men and 218 women with a mean age of 57.32 +/- 12.48 years. Gonioscopic grading was used to segregate occludable (slit-like, grades 1 and 2) from nonoccludable (grades 3 and 4) angles. Subjective assessment by gonioscopy resulted in an overestimation of angle width within the occludable group when compared with values obtained by UBM. This did not affect the segregation of occludable versus nonoccludable angles by gonioscopy. Biometric parameters in eyes with occludable angles were significantly lower in comparison with eyes with nonoccludable angles, except for lens thickness. AOD 500 correlated well with angle width. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that clinical segregation into occludable and nonoccludable angles by an experienced observer using gonioscopy is fairly accurate. However, UBM is required for objective quantification of angles, and AOD 500 can be a reliable and standard parameter to grade angle width.