Efficacy of Laser Iridotomy in Primary Angle Closure Suspects and Primary Angle Closure Glaucoma

N. I. Kurysheva; G. A. Sharova

doi:10.33791/2222-4408-2022-1-20-33

Efficacy of Laser Iridotomy in Primary Angle Closure Suspects and Primary Angle Closure Glaucoma

N. I. Kurysheva, G. A. Sharova

https://doi.org/10.33791/2222-4408-2022-1-20-33

Full Text:

PDF (Rus)

| HTML (Rus) Open Access

| XML (Rus) Open Access

Buy (200 RUB) |

Generate QR code

Abstract

Addressing the issue of a closed angle of the anterior chamber plays a key role in preventing the development of angleclosure glaucoma.
The purpose: to compare the efficacy of Laser Peripheral Iridotomy (LPI) at the stage of primary angle closure suspects (PACs) with LPI carried out at the initial stage of primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG).
Materials and methods. A clinical case of a primary angle closed disease (PACD) in a patient with PACs after LPI in the right eye and with PACG after LPI, selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) and phacoemulsification with intraocular lens implantation in the left eye is presented. A detailed examination was performed in dynamics, including methods of visualization of the anterior and posterior segments of the eye.
Results. After 2.5 years, the anterior chamber angle in the right eye retained an expanded profile after LPI (up to 30°), no signs of PACG development were recorded. On the left eye, the anterior chamber angle remained closed (9°) with an IOP of 24 mm Hg at the maximum hypotensive therapy with eye drops. Despite the absence of progression of glaucomatous optic neuropathy in both eyes, the risk of the transition from the initial stage to the moderate and advanced stage of PACG in the left eye still remains due to the presence of goniosynechia and possible fluctuations of intraocular pressure.
Conclusion. LPI is more effective at the stage of PACs and its implementation is advisable in order to prevent the development of PACG.

Keywords

primary angle closure suspect, progression of a primary angle closure suspect, primary angle closure glaucoma, laser iridotomy

About the Authors

N. I. Kurysheva

Medico-Biological University of Innovation and Continuing Education of Russian State Research Center − Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency; Russian State Research Center − Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency; Academy of Postgraduate Education of the Federal Scientific and Clinical Center for Specialized Medical Assistance and Medical Technologies of Federal Medical Biological Agency of Russia
Russian Federation

Natalya I. Kurysheva, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Head of the Ophthalmology Department; Professor of the Ophthalmology; Head of the Consultative and Diagnostic Department of the Ophthalmological Center

46, bldg. 8, Zhivopisnaya Str., Moscow, 123098

15, Gamalei Str., Moscow, 123098

15, bldg. 4, Gamalei Str., Moscow, 123098

G. A. Sharova

Eye Clinic of Doctor Belikova
Russian Federation

Galina A. Sharova, Laser Ophthalmic Surgeon, Head of Diagnostics Department

26/2, Budenny Ave., Moscow, 105118

References

1. Foster P.J., Buhrmann R., Quigley H.A., Johnson G.J. The definition and classification of glaucoma in prevalence surveys. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2002 Feb.,86(2):238–42. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.8и.2.238

2. Weinreb R.N., Moghimi S. Prophylactic laser iridotomy in primary angle-closure suspects. Lancet. 2019;Apr.,20;393(10181):1572–1574. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33059-9

3. He M., Jiang Y., Huang S., Chang D.S., Munoz B., Aung T., Foster P.J., Friedman D.S. Laser peripheral iridotomy for the prevention of angle closure: a single-centre, Randomized controlled trial. Lancet. 2019; Apr., 20;393(10181):1609–1618. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32607-2

4. Mani B., Sasikumar R., Wong H.T., Chew P., Foster P.J., Friedman D., Aung T. The Singapore Asymptomatic Narrow Angles Laser Iridotomy Study (ANA-LIS): 5-year results. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2016;57(12): No Pagination Specified

5. Thomas R., George R., Parikh R., Muliyil J., Jacob A. Five year risk of progression of primary angle closure suspects to primary angle closure: a population based study. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2003; Apr., 87(4):450–454. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.87.4.450

6. Wilensky J.T., Kaufman P.L., Frohlichstein D., Gieser D.K., Kass M.A., Ritch R., Anderson R. Follow-up of angle-closure glaucoma suspects. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 1993; Mar., 15;115(3):338–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9394(14)73585-8

7. Alsbirk P.H. Anatomical risk factors in primary angle-closure glaucoma. A ten year follow up survey based on limbal and axial anterior chamber depths in a high risk population. Int. Ophthalmol. 1992; Sep.,16(4–5):265–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00917973

8. Ye T., Yu Q., Peng S. et al. Six year follow-up of suspects of primary angle-closure glaucoma. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 1998; May, 34:167–69.

9. Zhang Y., Thomas R., Zhang Q., Li S.Z., Wang N.L. Progression of Primary Angle Closure Suspect to Primary Angle Closure and Associated Risk Factors: The Handan Eye Study. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2021; Jun, 1;62(7):2. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.62.7.2

10. Liza-Sharmini A.T., Sharina Y.N., Dolaboladi A.J., Zaid N.A., Azhany Y., Zunaina E. Clinical presentation, severity and progression of primary angle closure in malays. Med. J. Malaysia. 2014; Feb., 69(1):21–6.

11. Shao Z.J., Sun Z.C., Shi C.Y. A five year follow up survey of primary angle closure suspect. J. Clin. Ophthalmol. 2011;19:494–496.

12. Kurysheva N.I., Maslova E.V., Zolnikova I.V. et al. A comparative study of structural, functional and circulatory parameters in glaucoma diagnostics. PLoS ONE. 13(8):e0201599. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201599

13. Kurysheva N.I., Sharova G.A. The Role of Optical Coherence Tomography in the Diagnosis of Angle Closed Diseases of the Anterior Chamber. Part 1: Visualization of the Anterior Segment of the Eye. Ophthalmology. 2021;18(2):208–215. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18008/1816-5095-2021-2-208-215

14. Zebardast N., Kavitha S., Krishnamurthy P. et al. Changes in Anterior Segment Morphology and Predictors of Angle Widening after Laser Iridotomy in South Indian Eyes. Ophthalmology. 2016;123(12):2519–2526. https://doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.08.020

15. Xu B.Y., Friedman D.S., Foster P.J., Jiang Y., Pardeshi A.A., Jiang Y., Munoz B., Aung T., He M. Anatomic Changes and Predictors of Angle Widening after Laser Peripheral Iridotomy: The Zhongshan Angle Closure Prevention Trial. Ophthalmology. 2021; Aug.,128(8):1161–1168. https://doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2021.01.021

16. Zhekov I., Pardhan S., Bourne R.R. Optical coherence tomography-measured changes over time in anterior chamber angle and diurnal intraocular pressure after laser iridotomy: IMPACT study [published correction appears in Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019 May;47(4):557. Title corrected]. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 2018;46(8):895–902. https://doi:10.1111/ceo.13303

17. Belikova E.I., Sharova G.A. A Personalized Approach to the Treatment of Patients with Latent Stage Angle-Closure Glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2020;17(3S):566–571 (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18008/1816-5095-2020-3S-566-571

18. Gupta B., Angmo D., Yadav S., Dada T., Gupta V., Sihota R. Quantification of Iridotrabecular Contact in Primary Angle-Closure Disease. J. Glaucoma. 2020;29(8):681–688. https://doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000001572

19. Sihota R., Rishi K., Srinivasan G., Gupta V., Dada T., Singh K. Functional evaluation of an iridotomy in primary angle closure eyes. Graefes Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 2016;254(6):1141–1149. https://doi:10.1007/s00417-016-3298-x

20. Lee K.S., Sung K.R., Kang S.Y., Cho J.W., Kim D.Y., Kook M.S. Residual anterior chamber angle closure in narrow-angle eyes following laser peripheral iridotomy: anterior segment optical coherence tomography quantitative study. Jpn. J. Ophthalmol. 2011;55(3):213–219. https://doi:10.1007/s10384-011-0009-3

21. Nonaka A., Kondo T., Kikuchi M. et al. Cataract surgery for residual angle closure after peripheral laser iridotomy. Ophthalmology. 2005;112(6):974–979. https://doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.12.042

22. Jiang Y., Chang D.S., Zhu H. et al. Longitudinal changes of angle configuration in primary angle-closure suspects: the Zhongshan Angle-Closure Prevention Trial. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(9):1699–1705. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.03.039

23. Kwon J., Sung K.R., Han S. Long-term Changes in Anterior Segment Characteristics of Eyes With Different Primary Angle-Closure Mechanisms. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 2018; Jul.,191:54–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2018.04.005

24. Lee K.S., Sung K.R., Shon K., Sun J.H., Lee J.R. Longitudinal changes in anterior segment parameters after laser peripheral iridotomy assessed by anterior segment optical coherence tomography. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2013;54(5):3166–3170. Published 2013, May, 3. https://doi:10.1167/iovs.13-11630

25. Knepper P.A., Samples J.R. Glaucoma Research and Clinical Advances. The Netherlands: Kugler Publications, 2021; 105–112.

Review

For citations:

Kurysheva N.I., Sharova G.A. Efficacy of Laser Iridotomy in Primary Angle Closure Suspects and Primary Angle Closure Glaucoma. The EYE GLAZ. 2022;24(1):20-33. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.33791/2222-4408-2022-1-20-33

ISSN 2222-4408 (Print)
ISSN 2686-8083 (Online)

Username
Password
	Remember me
Not a user? Register with this site Forgot your password?

User

The EYE GLAZ

Efficacy of Laser Iridotomy in Primary Angle Closure Suspects and Primary Angle Closure Glaucoma

Full Text:

Abstract

Keywords

About the Authors

References

Review

For citations:

Cookies policy