PURPOSE: The pressure gradient between anterior and posterior chamber in acute angle closure (AAC) and primary angle closure suspects is balanced by a sufficient laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI). The anterior chamber changes induced by LPI in patients with unilateral AAC were examined and compared to healthy eyes to define threshold values, which may help to discriminate between healthy and diseased eyes. METHODS: Using Scheimpflug photography, anterior chamber depth (ACD), anterior chamber volume (ACV), anterior chamber angle (ACA), and central corneal thickness (CCT) were measured before and after LPI in both eyes of unilateral AAC cases. These measurements were compared to a group of healthy control eyes to determine threshold values for ACD, ACV, and ACA. RESULTS: The ACD, ACV, and ACA increased significantly in the 25 AAC eyes after LPI. The ACD, ACV, ACA, and CCT values in the AAC eyes obtained before LPI were compared to a control group of 59 healthy eyes with wide open chamber angles. The cutoff values revealed by receiver operating characteristic analysis were 2.1 mm for ACD, 90.5 mm2 for ACV, and 27.25° for ACA. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm the significant changes of the anterior segments architecture induced by LPI in AAC eyes. The found threshold values for ACD, ACV, and ACA may help in daily clinical routine to discriminate between healthy eyes and those in need for a prophylactic LPI.
PURPOSE: The pressure gradient between anterior and posterior chamber in acute angle closure (AAC) and primary angle closure suspects is balanced by a sufficient laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI). The anterior chamber changes induced by LPI in patients with unilateral AAC were examined and compared to healthy eyes to define threshold values, which may help to discriminate between healthy and diseased eyes. METHODS: Using Scheimpflug photography, anterior chamber depth (ACD), anterior chamber volume (ACV), anterior chamber angle (ACA), and central corneal thickness (CCT) were measured before and after LPI in both eyes of unilateral AAC cases. These measurements were compared to a group of healthy control eyes to determine threshold values for ACD, ACV, and ACA. RESULTS: The ACD, ACV, and ACA increased significantly in the 25 AAC eyes after LPI. The ACD, ACV, ACA, and CCT values in the AAC eyes obtained before LPI were compared to a control group of 59 healthy eyes with wide open chamber angles. The cutoff values revealed by receiver operating characteristic analysis were 2.1 mm for ACD, 90.5 mm2 for ACV, and 27.25° for ACA. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm the significant changes of the anterior segments architecture induced by LPI in AAC eyes. The found threshold values for ACD, ACV, and ACA may help in daily clinical routine to discriminate between healthy eyes and those in need for a prophylactic LPI.