BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The presentation and initial response to treatment of consecutive patients with exfoliation glaucoma (PXE) and primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) were evaluated prospectively. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-six consecutive newly diagnosed patients with POAG and PXE were included in a prospective study that evaluated the initial clinical course and treatment results. The two groups were age- and race-matched. RESULTS: This study found no difference in optic disc parameters at presentation between patients with POAG (n = 22) and those with PXE (n = 24) (P > .05). However, the presenting mean defect was significantly worse in patients with PXE versus those with POAG (P = .0038), although the loss variance was similar (P > .90). The mean presenting intraocular pressure (IOP) for patients with PXE (32.0 +/- 5.2 mm Hg) was greater than that for patients with POAG (27.1 +/- 4.4 mm Hg) (P= .0025). Additionally, patients with PXE required more treatment steps to control IOP (P = .005). Thirteen of 24 patients with PXE versus 3 of 22 patients with POAG (P = .016) required either laser or conventional surgical techniques to reduce IOP. CONCLUSION: This study shows that patients with PXE have greater visual field loss and have more difficulty gaining control of IOP on presentation than patients with POAG.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The presentation and initial response to treatment of consecutive patients with exfoliation glaucoma (PXE) and primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) were evaluated prospectively. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-six consecutive newly diagnosed patients with POAG and PXE were included in a prospective study that evaluated the initial clinical course and treatment results. The two groups were age- and race-matched. RESULTS: This study found no difference in optic disc parameters at presentation between patients with POAG (n = 22) and those with PXE (n = 24) (P > .05). However, the presenting mean defect was significantly worse in patients with PXE versus those with POAG (P = .0038), although the loss variance was similar (P > .90). The mean presenting intraocular pressure (IOP) for patients with PXE (32.0 +/- 5.2 mm Hg) was greater than that for patients with POAG (27.1 +/- 4.4 mm Hg) (P= .0025). Additionally, patients with PXE required more treatment steps to control IOP (P = .005). Thirteen of 24 patients with PXE versus 3 of 22 patients with POAG (P = .016) required either laser or conventional surgical techniques to reduce IOP. CONCLUSION: This study shows that patients with PXE have greater visual field loss and have more difficulty gaining control of IOP on presentation than patients with POAG.
Authors: K F Damji; A G P Konstas; J M Liebmann; W G Hodge; N G Ziakas; S Giannikakis; G Mintsioulis; A Merkur; Y Pan; R Ritch Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2006-05-03 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Tanya T Khan; Guorong Li; Iris D Navarro; Rama D Kastury; Carol J Zeil; Taras M Semchyshyn; Frank J Moya; David L Epstein; Pedro Gonzalez; Pratap Challa Journal: Mol Vis Date: 2010-11-02 Impact factor: 2.367
Authors: Seppo Rönkkö; Petri Rekonen; Kai Kaarniranta; Tuomo Puustjärvi; Markku Teräsvirta; Hannu Uusitalo Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2006-10-07 Impact factor: 3.535
Authors: Seppo Rönkkö; Petri Rekonen; Kai Kaarniranta; Tuomo Puustjarvi; Markku Teräsvirta; Hannu Uusitalo Journal: Mol Vis Date: 2007-03-26 Impact factor: 2.367