Zeyen_edit_Cardiology_book_temp 21/01/2010 12:28 Page 23
Glaucoma
Monitoring the Progressing Glaucoma Patient – What Are the Challenges?
Karolien Termote and Thierry Zeyen
Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospitals Leuven
Abstract
Diagnosing glaucoma progression is complex. It is essential to assess both structure and function to detect progression. Establishing a reliable
baseline is crucial in this process. A functional baseline requires repeated visual field testing. Documentation of the optic disc appearance is
necessary for the acquisition of the structural baseline. This can be achieved by the complementary modes of both clinical and imaging device-
based optic disc documentation. Imaging-based methods to assess progression and rate of progression are likely to prove important in the
future, but currently more guidance for their use in clinical practice is required. Rate of progression provides important information about
the risk of vision loss. Guidelines therefore recommend determining the rate of progression for the individual patient when planning
management. Adherence issues need to be addressed before changing treatment strategy, since poor compliance may play a considerable role
in the progression of disease in many patients. In conclusion, we must strive to improve the management of glaucoma to limit the impact
disease progression has on the patient’s quality of life.
Keywords
Glaucoma, progression, visual field, stereo photography, confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (CLSO), Heidelberg Retina Tomography (HRT),
glaucoma detection system with variable corneal compensation (GDx VCC), optical coherence tomography (OCT)
Disclosure: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Received: 26 August 2009 Accepted: 28 September 2009
Correspondence: Karolien Termote, Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospitals Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium.
E:
karolien.termote@uz.kuleuven.be
Support: Supported by Pfizer. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of Pfizer.
Glaucoma is a chronic, progressive optic neuropathy mostly associated structure and function to detect progression. It was generally
with elevated intraocular pressure (IOP).
1
Without adequate accepted that optic disc changes precede visual field (VF) damage.
5
management, glaucoma can lead to reduced quality of life (QoL) and However, the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS) and the
irreversible visual loss.
1
Glaucoma affects approximately 67 million European Glaucoma Prevention Study (EGPS) have shown that
people worldwide and is the second leading cause of blindness in structural and functional damage seldom overlap in patients
the world.
2
Detection of glaucoma progression is crucial for the converting from ocular hypertension (OHT) to glaucoma,
6,7
and that
identification of patients at risk of visual loss.
3
VF changes may precede optic disc damage. The same was shown
in glaucoma patients with progression.
8–10
Delaying Progression Poses Several Challenges
Delaying progression assumes first detection of progression, then Both optic disc photos/digital imaging and VF are complementary
determination of the rate of progression and, finally, adjustment of to monitor change, and VF is probably not the ideal gold standard to
treatment. Treatment decisions should be based on the available validate imaging devices. Statistically significant structure–function
scientific evidence and tailored to the individual patient. The goal of correlations exist only in patients with advanced glaucoma.
11
In terms
glaucoma treatment is to maintain the patient’s visual function and of the definitions of structural defects, the European Glaucoma
related QoL at a sustainable cost in terms of inconvenience, side Society (EGS) Guidelines describe clinical optic disc assessment, but
effects and financial implications.
3
the analysis is subjective.
3
Analysis of structural defects should ideally
be both qualitative and quantitative.
Detection of Progression
Definitions In the evaluation of functional defects, the EGS has made
European and US guidelines describe progression as a worsening recommendations in terms of the frequency of VF testing using
of structural and/or functional defects.
3,4
However, more detailed specific analysis tools.
3
The frequency of testing is to be adapted
definitions of progression have not yet been established. It is well- to the severity of glaucoma damage and the rate of progression.
3
known that progression can occur at normal IOP levels; therefore, This will be discussed below, in the section on determining the rate
we cannot rely on tonometry alone. It is essential to assess both of progression.
© TOUCH BRIEFINGS 2009 23
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116