CLINICAL CHANGES AND BIOMETRIC DIFFERENCES IN PATIENTS WITH PRIMARY OPEN ANGLE GLAUCOMA AND DIABETES

  • Anca PANTALON “Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi
  • Crenguta FERARU “Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi
  • D. CHISELITA “Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi
  • F. TARCOVEANU “Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi
Keywords: PRIMARY OPEN ANGLE GLAUCOMA, BIOMETRY, DIABETES

Abstract

Aim of study was to emphasize the clinical changes and biometric alterations that appear in primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) patients if diabetes was associated. Material and methods: The study was designed in a cross-sectional manner, between 2015-2016 in the Ophthalmology Clinic of “Sf. Spiridon” County Clinical Emergency Hospital from Iasi. We included 87 eyes, from 87 patients, distributed in 4 groups: 24 patients - the control group (cataract), 26 patients - the type II diabetes group, 16 patients – POAG group, 21 patients - the combined disease group (POAG + diabetes). We recorded data related to the age of the patients (years), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP-mmHg), perimetry parameters (MD, PSD-dB), biometric parameters (axial lengths, anterior chamber depth, CDE - Cumulative Dissipated Energy, lens thickness). The duration of glaucoma/diabetes, the type and number of glaucoma medications were noted. Similarly, the duration of diabetes mellitus, glycemic value and glycosylated hemoglobin were recorded. Results: Mean age calculated for the control group was 72.33+/-11.26 years, 69.04+/-9.46 years for the DM group, 75.69+/-5.54 years for the POAG group and 59.95+/-3.89 years for the combined pathology. Secondly, we found the highest IOP in the POAG+DM group, compared with the rest of the study categories (20.33+/-2.3 mmHg in group IV vs. 18.19+/-4.3 mmHg in group III vs. 15.50+/1.9 mmHg vs. 14.21+/-2.68 mmHg in group I), p<0.05. We found statistically significant differences between the four groups in respect of lens size and the CDE mean values. Our data revealed that the smallest energy was used in group IV (CDE=8.5+/-1.77), compared to all the other categories: I (CDE=17.79+/-7.36, p = 0.000), II (CDE=18.15+/-11.74, p = 0.000), III (CDE=13.90+/-8.11, p = 0.000). Estimated lens volume in group IV was 4.85+/-0.17mm in POAG+DM patients, significantly larger than the rest of the groups (p<0.05) Conclusions: younger age, higher IOP, larger lens volume and lower CDE mean values were the parameters significantly different in POAG patients, if diabetes was associated.

Author Biographies

Anca PANTALON, “Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi

Faculty of Medicine
1. Surgical Department of Surgery
“Sf. Spiridon” County Clinical Emergency Hospital Iasi
2. Ophthalmology Clinic

Crenguta FERARU, “Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi

Faculty of Medicine
1. Surgical Department of Surgery
“Sf. Spiridon” County Clinical Emergency Hospital Iasi
2. Ophthalmology Clinic

D. CHISELITA, “Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi

Faculty of Medicine
1. Surgical Department of Surgery
“Sf. Spiridon” County Clinical Emergency Hospital Iasi
2. Ophthalmology Clinic

F. TARCOVEANU, “Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi

Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi
Faculty of Medicine
1. Surgical Department of Surgery
“Sf. Spiridon” County Clinical Emergency Hospital Iasi
2. Ophthalmology Clinic

References

1. Primus S, Harris A, Siesky B, Guidoboni G. “Diabetes: a risk factor for glaucoma? NIH National Eye Institute Report, 2004.
2. Tham YC, Li X, Wong TY, et al. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology 2014; 121: 2081.
3. Shen L, Walter S, Melles R, Glymour M et al. Diabetes Pathology and Risk of Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma: Evaluating Causal Mechanisms by Using Genetic Information. Am J. Epidemiol 2016; 183(2): 147-155.
4. Leasher JL, Bourne RR, Flaxman SR et al. Vision Loss Expert Group of the Global Burden of Disease Study. Global Estimates on the Number of People Blind or Visually Impaired by Diabetic Retinopathy: A Meta-analysis From 1990 to 2010 Diabetes Care 2016; 39(9): 1643-1649.
5. ***Progression of Glaucoma – WGA Consensus Series 8. 2011 Kugler Publications, p106-107
6. Risner D, Ehrlich R, Kheradiya NS et al. effects of exercise on intraocular pressure and ocular blood flow: a review. J Glaucoma 2009; 18(6): 429-436.
7. Mori K, Ando F, Nomura H et al. Relationship between intraocular pressure and obesity in Japan. Int J Epimediol 2000; 29(4): 661-666.
8. ***European Glaucoma Society Guidelines, ed. 4, 2014, 11.
9. Hodapp E, Parrish IIRK, Anderson DR: Clinical decision in glaucoma. St Louis CV Mosby, 1993; 52-61.
10. Fingeret M. Optometric Clinical Practice Guideline, care of Patient with Open Angle Glaucoma, American Optometric Association 2011
11. Bron AJ, Sparrow J, Brown NA, Harding JJ, Blakytny R. The lens in diabetes. Eye (London). 1993; 7(Pt 2): 260-275.
12. Kubo E, Maekawa K, Tanimoto T, Fujisawa S, Akagi Y. Biochemical and morphological changes during development of sugar cataract in Otsuka Long-Evans Tokushima fatty (OLETF) rat. Exp Eye Res 2001; 73(3): 375-381.
13. Prum B, Rosenberg L, Gedde S. et al.: Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Preferred Practice Pattern Ophthalmology 2016; 123(1): P41-P111.
Published
2017-12-22