Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Ophthalmology. 2004 Aug;111(8):1489-94.

Retinal venous pulsation in glaucoma and glaucoma suspects.

Author information

1
Lions Eye Institute, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. whmorgan@cyllene.uwa.edu.au

Abstract

PURPOSE:

To determine whether changes in central retinal vein pulsation characteristics occur in glaucoma, and how these are related to indices of glaucoma severity.

DESIGN:

A large, consecutive, prospective, case-controlled study.

PARTICIPANTS:

Ninety-four consecutive glaucoma patients and 105 glaucoma suspects seen in a tertiary referral clinic were examined. Forty-one age-matched normal subjects also were examined.

METHODS:

The presence or absence of spontaneous venous pulsation was observed in these 3 groups. The ophthalmodynamometric force (ODF) required to induce venous pulsation at the optic disc was measured in those without spontaneous pulsation. Optic disc photographs were obtained and visual field testing was performed for all subjects.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

The prevalence of spontaneous venous pulsation between these 3 groups was compared. The relationship between ODF and visual field mean deviation, neuroretinal rim area, age, intraocular pressure (IOP), gender, and diagnosis of glaucoma was investigated using linear mixed models fitted by Gibb's sampling.

RESULTS:

Significantly fewer (chi-square, 27.7; P<0.001) glaucoma patients (54%) were observed to have spontaneous venous pulsation than suspects (75%) or normals (98%). A worse visual field mean deviation was shown to be the most significant predictor of a higher ODF (P<0.000), with younger age (P<0.000) also predictive of a higher ODF. A strong relationship between ODF and mean deviation was found in the glaucoma patients (r = 0.59; n = 52; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS:

Spontaneous venous pulsation is less common in glaucoma. The ODF required to induce venous pulsation is increased in glaucoma, and this ODF is greater in those with more severe field loss.

Comment in

PMID:
15288976
DOI:
10.1016/j.ophtha.2003.12.053
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center