Advertisement

EPMA Journal

pp 1–11 | Cite as

Relationship between ocular biometry and severity of primary angle-closure glaucoma: relevance for predictive, preventive, and personalized medicine

  • Shengjie LiEmail author
  • Mingxi Shao
  • Yani Wan
  • Binghua Tang
  • Xinghuai Sun
  • Wenjun CaoEmail author
Research
  • 4 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Several ocular factors have been identified for primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG), such as a small cornea, elevated intraocular pressure (IOP), shallow anterior chamber, and short axial length (AL). However, the relationship between the severity of PACG and various ocular parameters [IOP, anterior chamber depth, AL, central corneal thickness] is not fully understood.

Methods

A 7-year cross-sectional study. A total of 2254 eyes of 1312 PACG patients (females = 856 [1479 eyes] and males = 456 [775 eyes]) were included. A detailed eye examination was performed. The participants were categorized into gender subgroups followed by subdivision into three different severity groups according to their mean deviation (MD) of the visual fields results as follows: mild (MD ≤ 6 dB), moderate (MD 6–12 dB), and severe (MD > 12 dB) PACG. The associations of ocular biometry with severity of PACG were analyzed using paired Student’s t test, multivariate linear regression, and logistic regression analysis.

Results

There was a significant positive correlation between the MD and AL in the female subgroup (B = 0.663, p = 0.001, 95%CI = 1.070 to 1.255) but not in the male subgroup. Increased AL levels (mild [OR = 1], moderate [OR = 1.047, p = 0.062, 95%CI = 0.947 to 2.462], and severe [OR = 1.274, p < 0.001, 95%CI = 1.114 to 1.457]) were only associated with the severity of PACG in females. Paired Student’s t tests showed that the long AL female eyes have a higher MD value than in the short AL female eyes (mean difference = 3.09, t = 6.846, p < 0.001) in the same subjects, but not in the male subgroup (p = 0.648).

Conclusions

The AL was positively and significantly related to the severity of PACG in female but not male subjects. This finding refers to the PACG pathogenesis and suggests the use of AL assessment in glaucoma monitoring, diagnosis, and progression. This may contribute to further development of personalized strategies in preventive medicine.

Keywords

Glaucoma Primary angle-closure glaucoma Ocular parameters Axial length Female Patient stratification Clinical medicine Recommendations Individualized patient profile Predictive preventive personalized medicine 

Notes

Funding information

This work was supported by Shanghai Sailing Program (18YF1403500), Shanghai Municipal Commission of Health and Family Planning (20174Y0169), Shanghai Municipal Commission of Health and Family Planning (201840050), The State Key Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China (81430007), The subject of major projects of National Natural Science Foundation of China (81790641), The Shanghai Committee of Science and Technology, China (17410712500), and The top priority of clinical medicine center of Shanghai (2017ZZ01020). Shanghai Science and Technology Committee Foundation grant (19411964600). The sponsor or funding organization had no role in the design or conduct of this research.

Compliance with ethical standards

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Consent for publication

All individuals were informed about the purposes of the study and have signed their consent for publishing the data.

Ethical approval

All the patient investigations conformed to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and have been performed with the permission EENT2015011 released by the responsible Ethic’s Committee of Eye & ENT Hospital of Fudan University. All the patients were informed about the purposes of the study and have signed their “consent of the patient.” This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

13167_2019_174_MOESM1_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Supplementary Table 1 (DOCX 13 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Tham Y-C, Li X, Wong TY, Quigley HA, Aung T, Cheng C-Y. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2014;121:2081–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sun X, Dai Y, Chen Y, Yu D-Y, Cringle SJ, Chen J, et al. Primary angle closure glaucoma: what we know and what we don’t know. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2017;57:26–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Karvonen E, Stoor K, Luodonpää M, Hägg P, Kuoppala J, Lintonen T, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma in the northern Finland birth cohort eye study. Acta Ophthalmol. 2019;97:200–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jonas JB, Aung T, Bourne RR, Bron AM, Ritch R, Panda-Jonas S. Glaucoma. Lancet Lond Engl. 2017;390:2183–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Quigley HA, Broman AT. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90:262–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Binggeli T, Schoetzau A, Konieczka K. In glaucoma patients, low blood pressure is accompanied by vascular dysregulation. EPMA J. 2018;9:387–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    George R, Paul PG, Baskaran M, Ramesh SV, Raju P, Arvind H, et al. Ocular biometry in occludable angles and angle closure glaucoma: a population based survey. Br J Ophthalmol. 2003;87:399–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lan Y-W, Hsieh J-W, Hung P-T. Ocular biometry in acute and chronic angle-closure glaucoma. Ophthalmologica. 2007;221:388–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marchini G, Pagliarusco A, Toscano A, Tosi R, Brunelli C, Bonomi L. Ultrasound biomicroscopic and conventional ultrasonographic study of ocular dimensions in primary angle-closure glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:2091–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sihota R, Dada T, Gupta R, Lakshminarayan P, Pandey RM. Ultrasound biomicroscopy in the subtypes of primary angle closure glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2005;14:387–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chen Y-Y, Chen Y-Y, Sheu S-J, Chou P. The biometric study in different stages of primary angle-closure glaucoma. Eye. 2013;27:1070–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nolan WP, Baasanhu J, Undraa A, Uranchimeg D, Ganzorig S, Johnson GJ. Screening for primary angle closure in Mongolia: a randomised controlled trial to determine whether screening and prophylactic treatment will reduce the incidence of primary angle closure glaucoma in an east Asian population. Br J Ophthalmol. 2003;87:271–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Thapa SS, Paudyal I, Khanal S, Paudel N, van Rens GHMB. Comparison of axial lengths in occludable angle and angle-closure glaucoma--the Bhaktapur Glaucoma study. Optom Vis. 2011;88:150–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jiang X, Varma R, Wu S, Torres M, Azen SP, Francis BA, et al. Los Angeles Latino eye study group baseline risk factors that predict the development of open-angle glaucoma in a population: the Los Angeles Latino eye study. Ophthalmology. 2012;119:2245–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Suzuki Y, Iwase A, Araie M, Yamamoto T, Abe H, Shirato S, et al. Risk factors for open-angle glaucoma in a Japanese population: the Tajimi study. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:1613–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Qiu M, Wang SY, Singh K, Lin SC. Association between myopia and glaucoma in the United States population. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54:830–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Xu L, Wang Y, Wang S, Wang Y, Jonas JB. High myopia and glaucoma susceptibility the Beijing eye study. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:216–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Czudowska MA, Ramdas WD, Wolfs RCW, Hofman A, De Jong PTVM, Vingerling JR, et al. Incidence of glaucomatous visual field loss: a ten-year follow-up from the Rotterdam study. Ophthalmology. 2010;117:1705–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hagan S, Martin E, Enríquez-de-Salamanca A. Tear fluid biomarkers in ocular and systemic disease: potential use for predictive, preventive and personalised medicine. EPMA J. 2016;7:15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sabel BA, Wang J, Cárdenas-Morales L, Faiq M, Heim C. Mental stress as consequence and cause of vision loss: the dawn of psychosomatic ophthalmology for preventive and personalized medicine. EPMA J. 2018;9:133–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Li S, Chen Y, Shao M, Tang L, Sun X, Cao W. Association of plasma complement C3 levels with primary angle-closure glaucoma in older women. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2017;58:682–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mitchell P, Smith W, Attebo K, Healey PR. Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma in Australia. The Blue Mountains eye study. Ophthalmology. 1996;103:1661–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Casson RJ, Baker M, Edussuriya K, Senaratne T, Selva D, Sennanayake S. Prevalence and determinants of angle closure in Central Sri Lanka: the Kandy eye study. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:1444–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Li S, Shao M, Tang B, Zhang A, Cao W, Sun X. The association between serum uric acid and glaucoma severity in primary angle closure glaucoma: a retrospective case-control study. Oncotarget. 2017;8:2816–24.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Atalay E, Nongpiur ME, Yap SC, Wong TT, Goh D, Husain R, et al. Pattern of visual field loss in primary angle-closure glaucoma across different severity levels. Ophthalmology. 2016;123:1957–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yarmohammadi A, Zangwill LM, Diniz-Filho A, Suh MH, Yousefi S, Saunders LJ, et al. Relationship between optical coherence tomography angiography vessel density and severity of visual field loss in glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2016;123:2498–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kim NR, Kim CY, Oh JH, Lee ES. Corneal thickness and anterior chamber depth by Orbscan in normal and primary open-angle glaucoma patients in Korea. J Glaucoma. 2008;17:465–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Moghimi S, Vahedian Z, Fakhraie G, Ghaffari R, Eslami Y, Jabarvand M, et al. Ocular biometry in the subtypes of angle closure: an anterior segment optical coherence tomography study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2013;155:664–673, 673.e1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Adewara BA, Adegbehingbe BO, Onakpoya OH, Ihemedu CG. Relationship between intraocular pressure, anterior chamber depth and lens thickness in primary open-angle glaucoma patients. Int Ophthalmol. 2018;38:541-7.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Marcus MW, de Vries MM, Junoy Montolio FG, Jansonius NM. Myopia as a risk factor for open-angle glaucoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:1989–1994.e2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yanagisawa M, Yamashita T, Matsuura M, Fujino Y, Murata H, Asaoka R. Changes in axial length and progression of visual field damage in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2018;59:407–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jonas JB, Xu L, Wei WB, Pan Z, Yang H, Holbach L, et al. Retinal thickness and axial length. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2016;57:1791–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bai HX, Mao Y, Shen L, Xu XL, Gao F, Zhang ZB, et al. Bruch’s membrane thickness in relationship to axial length. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0182080.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jonas JB, Kutscher JN, Panda-Jonas S, Hayreh SS. Lamina cribrosa thickness correlated with posterior scleral thickness and axial length in monkeys. Acta Ophthalmol. 2016;94:e693–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma PPP (2015) Available online: https://www.aao.org/preferred-practice-pattern/primary-open-angle-glaucoma-ppp-2015. Accessed 11 Nov 2018.
  36. 36.
    Golubnitschaja O, Costigliola V, EPMA. General report & recommendations in predictive, preventive and personalised medicine 2012: white paper of the European Association for Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine. EPMA J. 2012;3:14.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Golubnitschaja O, Baban B, Boniolo G, Wang W, Bubnov R, Kapalla M, et al. Medicine in the early twenty-first century: paradigm and anticipation - EPMA position paper 2016. EPMA J. 2016;7:23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Association for Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine (EPMA) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Clinical Laboratory, Eye & ENT Hospital, Shanghai Medical CollegeFudan UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Department of Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Eye & ENT Hospital, Shanghai Medical CollegeFudan UniversityShanghaiChina
  3. 3.NHC Key Laboratory of Myopia (Fudan University), Key Laboratory of MyopiaChinese Academy of Medical Sciences, and Shanghai Key Laboratory of Visual Impairment and Restoration (Fudan University)ShanghaiChina
  4. 4.State Key Laboratory of Medical Neurobiology, Institutes of Brain Science and Collaborative Innovation Center for Brain ScienceFudan UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations