Author(s): Lestk J, Nutterov E, Pitrov S
Abstract Share this page
Abstract AIM: To establish, using modern examination methods, the possibility to determine the damage of visual functions characteristic for glaucoma in pigmentary dispersion syndrome (PDS) earlier than using classical methods, and, if the pigmentary glaucoma (PG) differs in the visual functions damage from the primary open angle glaucoma (POAG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The followed-up cohort of 21 persons (altogether examined 34 eyes) was divided into four groups: in the first group, there were the healthy controls and the next three groups were divided according to the type of the disease. The first group consisted of 10 eyes of 5 healthy persons (1 woman aged 50 years and 4 men in the age 23-45 years). The average refractive error in this group was -0.25 diopters. In the second group, 10 eyes of 7 patients with PDS (out of them 2 women at the age 55 and 56 years respectively, and 5 men, age 27-46 years) were included. The average refractive error in this group was -2.85 diopters. The third group comprised 9 eyes of 6 patients with PG (3 women aged 50-56 years and 3 men at the age 21-49 years). The average refractive error in this group was -5.0 diopters. The fourth group consisted of 5 eyes of 3 patients (one woman at the age of 44 years and two men at the age 35 and 50 years) with POAG. The average refractive error in this group was -1.0 diopter. The age structure in all groups was comparable. In the followed-up cohort of 21 persons, the refractive error, the visual acuity, (EDTRS charts), gonioscopy (evaluated according to Spaeth classification), intraocular pressure (non-contact device Canon TX 10 and applanation tonometer Inami), visual field testing (Medmont M700), nerve fiber layer measurement (GDx -VCC), macular volume (MV - OCT Stratus), PR-ERG, PR-VEP (Retiscan according to the ISCEV methodology) were examined. RESULTS: The statistical evaluation of the results and their mutual comparing among separate groups with following outputs were performed: 1. The control group and the PDS group: statistically significant differences were established in GDx and MV. Statistically most significant were the differences in PR-ERG and PR-VEP amplitudes (t = 28, eventually 18.254 against the tabularized value 2.845). 2. The control group against the PG group: statistically significant differences were found in GDx, MV, and PR-ERG and PR-VEP amplitudes as well. 3. The control group against the POAG group: statistically significant differences were found in GDx and MV. Statistically most important difference was found in the PR-VEP amplitude (t = 63.973 against the tabularized value 3.012). 4. The PDS group versus PG group: statistically significant differences were found in GDx and MV as well. Statistically most important difference was found in the PR-VEP amplitude (t = 36.75 against the tabularized value 2,898). CONCLUSION: Using the modern diagnostic techniques, the PDS and PG may be differentiated. Statistically significant differences were found in GDx and in MV as well. The biggest difference was in PR-ERG and in PR-VEP. Differentiated slowing down of the excitations conduction speed in the visual evoked responses, which presents in PG and in PDS as well, may provide close proximity of both diseases. Because of that, it is appropriate to follow up the patients with the PDS in the same way as the glaucoma patients.
This article was published in Cesk Slov Oftalmol
and referenced in Journal of Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology