Ronnie George1, Smita Panda2, Lingam Vijaya2. 1. Jadhavbai Nathamal Singhvee Glaucoma Services, Medical Research Foundation, Sankara Nethralaya, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India. drrg@snmail.org. 2. Jadhavbai Nathamal Singhvee Glaucoma Services, Medical Research Foundation, Sankara Nethralaya, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India.
Abstract
AIM: To estimate the risk of blindness with primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG) compared to primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) in those population-based studies that reported blindness rates for both PACG and POAG. METHOD: A systematic search was performed in PubMed for articles published in English between 2000 and 2020 reporting the prevalence of POAG as well as PACG among various ethnic populations. A study was included if it was (1) population-based (2) had published prevalence and blindness rates for both PACG and POAG in the same cohort. (3) Glaucoma was defined as per the International Society for Geographical and Epidemiological Ophthalmology (ISGEO) criteria. The proportion of blindness for both POAG and PACG for each study and the cumulative proportion taking all the studies were calculated. RESULTS: We included 23 studies with 78,434 participants. POAG was diagnosed in 1702 persons with 151 (8.9%) blind. There were 724 cases of PACG with 196 (27.0%) blind. The risk ratio of blindness in PACG to POAG varied from 0.73 to 10.6 among the studies. The cumulative risk ratio was 2.39 (95% confidence interval (CI); 1.99, 2.87). Risk ratios for studies including visual field restriction while defining blindness were similar to studies that did not (1.92 vs 2.64, P = 0.11). Risk ratios were also similar for studies that used greater than 2 instead of 3 or more quadrants of iridotrabecular contact to define angle closure (2.79 vs 2.25). CONCLUSION: Primary angle-closure disease is more likely to be associated with blindness.
AIM: To estimate the risk of blindness with primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG) compared to primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) in those population-based studies that reported blindness rates for both PACG and POAG. METHOD: A systematic search was performed in PubMed for articles published in English between 2000 and 2020 reporting the prevalence of POAG as well as PACG among various ethnic populations. A study was included if it was (1) population-based (2) had published prevalence and blindness rates for both PACG and POAG in the same cohort. (3) Glaucoma was defined as per the International Society for Geographical and Epidemiological Ophthalmology (ISGEO) criteria. The proportion of blindness for both POAG and PACG for each study and the cumulative proportion taking all the studies were calculated. RESULTS: We included 23 studies with 78,434 participants. POAG was diagnosed in 1702 persons with 151 (8.9%) blind. There were 724 cases of PACG with 196 (27.0%) blind. The risk ratio of blindness in PACG to POAG varied from 0.73 to 10.6 among the studies. The cumulative risk ratio was 2.39 (95% confidence interval (CI); 1.99, 2.87). Risk ratios for studies including visual field restriction while defining blindness were similar to studies that did not (1.92 vs 2.64, P = 0.11). Risk ratios were also similar for studies that used greater than 2 instead of 3 or more quadrants of iridotrabecular contact to define angle closure (2.79 vs 2.25). CONCLUSION: Primary angle-closure disease is more likely to be associated with blindness.
Authors: Yuan Bo Liang; David S Friedman; Qiang Zhou; Xiaohui Yang; Lan Ping Sun; Li Xia Guo; Qiu Shan Tao; Dolly S Chang; Ning Li Wang Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2011-10-21 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Lingam Vijaya; Ronnie George; M Baskaran; Hemamalini Arvind; Prema Raju; S Ve Ramesh; Govindasamy Kumaramanickavel; Catherine McCarty Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2007-07-30 Impact factor: 12.079