Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Different types of optic disc shape in patients with advanced open-angle glaucoma

  • Clinical Investigation
  • Published:
Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To study the characteristics of patients with advanced open-angle glaucoma.

Methods

A hospital-based retrospective study was performed. Advanced glaucoma was defined as visual acuity of 0.3 or less, or mean deviation of −24 dB or less. First, we screened patients with advanced glaucoma and classified their glaucoma types. For patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG), including both primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and normal-tension glaucoma (NTG), disc types were classified into four groups: focal ischemic (FI), myopic glaucomatous (MY), senile sclerotic (SS), and generalized cup enlargement (GE).

Results

After checking the medical history of 750 glaucoma patients, we classified 141 (18.8%) as having the advanced stage of the disease. The proportion of patients with advanced OAG was 47% (28% POAG, 19% NTG). The classification of optic disc appearances in OAG patients showed that in patients with POAG the predominant disc type was GE (P = 0.0012) and in those with NTG it was MY (P < 0.0001).

Conclusion

In OAG patients in this study with severe glaucomatous damage, the predominant disc phenotype was GE in patients with POAG and MY in those with NTG.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Quigley HA. Number of people with glaucoma worldwide. Br J Ophthalmol 1996;80:389–393.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. The effectiveness of intraocular pressure reduction in the treatment of normal-tension glaucoma. Collaborative Normal-Tension Glaucoma Study Group. Am J Ophthalmol 1998;126:498–505.

  3. Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Hussein M. Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120:1268–1279.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kass MA, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: a randomized trial determines that topical ocular hypotensive medication delays or prevents the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120:701–713; discussion 829–730.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Iwase A, Suzuki Y, Araie M, et al. The prevalence of primary openangle glaucoma in Japanese: the Tajimi Study. Ophthalmology 2004;111:1641–1648.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Geijssen HC, Greve EL. Vascular concepts in glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 1995;6:71–77.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nicolela MT, Drance SM. Various glaucomatous optic nerve appearances: clinical correlations. Ophthalmology 1996;103:640–649.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Anderson DR, Drance SM, Schulzer M. Natural history of normaltension glaucoma. Ophthalmology 2001;108:247–253.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hart WM Jr, Yablonski M, Kass MA, Becker B. Multivariate analysis of the risk of glaucomatous visual field loss. Arch Ophthalmol 1979;97:1455–1458.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Armaly MF, Krueger DE, Maunder L, et al. Biostatistical analysis of the collaborative glaucoma study. I. Summary report of the risk factors for glaucomatous visual-field defects. Arch Ophthalmol 1980;98:2163–2171.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yablonski ME, Zimmerman TJ, Kass MA, Becker B. Prognostic significance of optic disk cupping in ocular hypertensive patients. Am J Ophthalmol 1980;89:585–592.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120:714–720; discussion 829–730.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sawada A, Tomidokoro A, Araie M, Iwase A, Yamamoto T. Refractive errors in an elderly Japanese population: the Tajimi study. Ophthalmology 2008;115:363–370.e3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sperduto RD, Seigel D, Roberts J, Rowland M. Prevalence of myopia in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol 1983;101:405–407.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kempen JH, Mitchell P, Lee KE, et al. The prevalence of refractive errors among adults in the United States, Western Europe, and Australia. Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:495–505.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Podos SM, Becker B, Morton WR. High myopia and primary openangle glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1966;62:1038–1043.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Perkins ES, Phelps CD. Open angle glaucoma, ocular hypertension, low-tension glaucoma, and refraction. Arch Ophthalmol 1982;100:1464–1467.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fong DS, Epstein DL, Allingham RR. Glaucoma and myopia: are they related? Int Ophthalmol Clin 1990;30:215–218.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wilson MR, Hertzmark E, Walker AM, Childs-Shaw K, Epstein DL. A case-control study of risk factors in open angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1987;105:1066–1071.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mitchell P, Hourihan F, Sandbach J, Wang JJ. The relationship between glaucoma and myopia: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmology 1999;106:2010–2015.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Wong TY, Klein BE, Klein R, Knudtson M, Lee KE. Refractive errors, intraocular pressure, and glaucoma in a white population. Ophthalmology 2003;110:211–217.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Phelps CD. Effect of myopia on prognosis in treated primary openangle glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1982;93:622–628.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Chihara E, Liu X, Dong J, et al. Severe myopia as a risk factor for progressive visual field loss in primary open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmologica 1997;211:66–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan

    Toru Nakazawa, Nobuo Fuse, Kazuko Omodaka, Naoko Aizawa & Kohji Nishida

  2. Department of Ophthalmology, Sendai City Hospital, Sendai, Japan

    Souichiro Kuwahara

  3. Department of Ophthalmology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1 Seiryo-machi, Aoba-ku, Sendai, Miyagi, 980-8574, Japan

    Toru Nakazawa

Authors
  1. Toru Nakazawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nobuo Fuse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kazuko Omodaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Naoko Aizawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Souichiro Kuwahara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kohji Nishida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Toru Nakazawa.

About this article

Cite this article

Nakazawa, T., Fuse, N., Omodaka, K. et al. Different types of optic disc shape in patients with advanced open-angle glaucoma. Jpn J Ophthalmol 54, 291–295 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10384-010-0816-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10384-010-0816-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation