Ocular Hypertensive Patients (ocular + hypertensive_patient)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Selected Abstracts

Retinal nerve fiber layer thickness and central corneal thickness in ocular hypertensive patients and healthy subjects

Purpose To establish the correlation between central corneal thickness (CCT) and retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness in ocular hypertensive patients and healthy subjects. Methods We prospectively collected charts of healthy subjects and ocular hypertensive (OHT) patients in one academic center between 2007 and 2008. OHT patients were defined by two measurements of intraocular pressure superior to 21mmHg without treatment, open angle in gonioscopy, normal appearing optic nerve head and normal visual field test Standard Automated Perimetry (SAP SITA) and Frequency Doubling Technique (FDT). Every patient underwent a standard clinical examination including optic nerve head examination, intraocular pressure, CCT measurement by ultrasonic (US) and anterior segment OCT pachymetry, visual field testing (SAP and FDT), RNFL thickness by scanning laser polarimetry (GDX-VCC) and optical coherence tomography (OCT). Results Eighty healthy subjects and 60 OHT patients were included. A correlation between US CCT and OCT CCT was found in both groups (r2=0.85 and r2= 0.87, p<0.001). There was no significant difference (p>0.15) in GDX-VCC and OCT RNFL thickness in both groups. In controls there was no correlation of any RNFL thickness measurement with the CCT. In OHT patients, the US CCT was weakly correlated with the average TSNIT evaluated by GDX-VCC (r2= 0.04, p<0.02). Conclusion This study did not show any relevant correlation between the RNFL thickness evaluated by GDX-VCC and the US CCT in healthy individuals and in OHT patients with a normal FDT. [source]

ATD perimetry in glaucoma and ocular hypertensive patients.

A preliminar study
Purpose: The new ATD perimetry assesses contrast sentivity thresholds for the three afferent sensory pathways of the visual system. Our aim is to compare contrast sensitivity to stimuli with different spatio-temporal frequencies in glaucomatous (G) and ocular hypertensive (OHT) subjects. Methods: Twenty three G and OHT subjects were selected from the ophthalmic clinic, all subjects signed an informed consent. Inclusion criteria were diagnosis of G or OHT, normal Farnsworth-Munsell color test, ametropia less than 6 D, visual acuity over 20/30, absence of previous ocular surgery and experience in perimetry. Twenty locations and the fovea were evaluated in a 60º x 40º fovea-centered field. Eight gabor stimuli were used: 0.5cpd-12Hz, 0.5cpd-24Hz, 4cpd-2Hz and 4cpd 12Hz, modulated along the achromatic (A) direction, 0.5cpd-12Hz and 4cpd-2Hz along the red/green (T) and blue/yellow (D) directions. Statistical analysis included ANOVA and Schéffé tests. Results: Mean thresholds for G and OHT were respectively, 0.4872 ± 0.5323 and 0.1077 ± 0.1922, for A 0.5cpd-12Hz; 0.7296 ± 0.5925 and 0.2280 ± 0.2246 for stimulus A 0.5cpd-24Hz; 1.4444 ± 0.5244 and 1,2671 ± 0.6138 for A 4cpd-2Hz; and 0.7751 ± 0.1937 and 0.6851 ± 0.2379 for D 0.5cpd-12Hz. Significant statistical differences (p<0.05) were found between G and OHT groups only with these stimuli. Conclusions: These preliminary results show that certain stimuli may differentiate between G and OHT subjects. A larger population sample, including glaucoma suspects, is currently under study. [source]

A comparison of short wavelength automated perimetry with frequency doubling perimetry for the early detection of visual field loss in ocular hypertension

John Landers MBBS
ABSTRACT Background: Achromatic automated perimetry (AAP) is limited in its ability to detect very early visual field loss in ocular hypertensive patients. Tests targeting axons that are selectively damaged, or have low redundancy, may detect visual field losses before they are seen on AAP. It has been claimed that short wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP) and frequency doubling perimetry (FDP) are two tests that provide early detection. Methods: Patients (n = 62) were selected on the basis that they had raised intraocular pressure but normal visual fields detected by AAP. A SWAP and an FDP was performed on each of the patients and the results compared. Fields were scored as either normal or abnormal based on criteria used in previous studies. Results: On comparing FDP with SWAP as the ,gold standard', a sensitivity of 88.9% and a specificity of 96.2% was found, showing a high concordance between the two tests. Conclusion: These results suggest that as SWAP may be predictive of AAP visual field loss, FDP may be similarly predictive. [source]