Skip to main page content

Retinal Vein Occlusion in Patients with Primary Angle Closure Suspects, Primary Angle Closure and Primary Angle Closure Glaucoma: A Prospective Case-Control Study

Paper Presentation | Présentation d'article
4:07 PM, Friday 10 Jun 2022 (8 minutes)

Authors: Harrison Watt, Ali Salimi, Cody Li, John Galic, John Chen, Jesia Hasan, Hady Saheb. McGill University.

Author Disclosure Block: H. Watt: None. A. Salimi: None. C. Li: None. J. Galic: None. J. Chen: None. J. Hasan: None. H. Saheb: None.

Abstract Body:

Purpose: The prevalence of primary angle closure glaucoma (PACG) in patients with central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) is reported to be between 0% and 9%. Multiple studies have attempted to establish the directionality of this potential association, but there is yet to be a consensus in the literature. To that end, the purpose of the current study is to compare the prevalence of angle-closure in eyes with retinal vein occlusion (RVO) to control eyes, as well as to assess the possible association between angle-closure and RVO.

Study Design: This prospective, blinded case-control study included patients with a history of RVO (case group) and patients with other retinal diagnoses (control group), matched by age (within the same decade) and manifest refraction (within 1 Diopter of spherical equivalent).

Methods: Clinical characteristics and angle-based structures derived from anterior segment ocular coherence tomography (AS-OCT)were assessed and statistically compared between the two groups, with alpha set at 0.05 for statistical significance.

Results: According to an a priori sample size calculation, a total of 64 patients (32 per group) were included. The average age of the RVO and control groups was 58.09±12.20 years and 59.41±9.62, respectively (p=0.634). There were no significant differences between the clinical characteristics of the two groups, including intraocular pressure(p=0.535) and Shaffer gonioscopy grading (p=0.632). None of the AS-OCT-derived angle characteristics were significantly different between the two groups. The number of angle-closure diagnoses did not significantly differ between the two groups. Comparison of the AS-OCT-derived angle characteristics of RVO eyes to their contralateral non-RVOeyes did not reveal any significant differences.

Conclusions: The present prospective, blinded, matched case-control study did not evidence any significant differences in clinical and AS-OCT-derived structural measures between the RVO and control eyes. Additionally, there were no structural differences between the RVO eyes and their contralateral non-RVO eyes. Collectively, these findings refute the evidence suggesting an association between primary angle-closure mechanisms and RVO.

Session detail
Allows attendees to send short textual feedback to the organizer for a session. This is only sent to the organizer and not the speakers.
To respect data privacy rules, this option only displays profiles of attendees who have chosen to share their profile information publicly.

Changes here will affect all session detail pages