Difference in glaucoma progression between the first and second eye after consecutive bilateral glaucoma surgery in patients with bilateral uveitic glaucoma.

Din, Norshamsiah; Talat, Lazha; Isa, Hazlita; Tomkins-Netzer, Oren; Barton, Keith; Lightman, Sue

Purpose: To determine whether the second eyes (SE) of patients with bilateral uveitic glaucoma undergoing filtration surgery have more glaucomatous progression in terms of visual acuity, visual field (VF) and optic nerve changes compared to the first eyes (FE). Methods: This retrospective study analysed data of 60 eyes from 30 patients with bilateral uveitic glaucoma who had undergone glaucoma surgery in both eyes on separate occasions. Humphrey VF progression was assessed using the Progressor software. Results: The pre-operative IOP between the FE (43.1 ± 7.7 mmHg) and SE (40 ± 8.7 mmHg) was not statistically significant ( p = 0.15). IOP reduction was greater in the FE (64 %) than SE (59.7 %) post-operatively, but the mean IOP at the final visit in the FE (12.3 ± 3.9 mmHg) and SE (14.5 ± 7 mmHg) was not statistically different ( p = 0.2). There was no significant change in mean logMAR readings pre and post-operatively (0.45 ± 0.6 vs 0.37 ± 0.6, p = 0.4) or between the FE and SE. The number of SE with CDR > 0.7 increased by 23 % compared to the FE. From 23 available VFs, five SE (21.7 %) progressed at a median of five locations (range 1-11 points) with a mean local slope reduction of 1.74 ± 0.45 dB/year (range −2.39 to −1.26), whereas only one FE progressed. However, there was no significant difference between mean global rate of progression between the FE (−0.9 ± 1.6 dB/year) and SE (−0.76 ± 2.1 dB/year, p = 0.17) in the Humphrey VF. Conclusion: In eyes with bilateral uveitic glaucoma requiring glaucoma surgery, the SEs had more progressed points on VF and glaucomatous disc progression compared to FEs at the final visit.

GLAUCOMA surgery; DISEASE progression; VISUAL acuity; VISUAL fields; POSTOPERATIVE care

Graefe's Archive of Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology, 2016, Vol 254, Issue 12, p2439

0721-832X

Academic Journal

10.1007/s00417-016-3460-5