Decreased ocular pulse amplitude associated with functional and structural damage in open-angle glaucoma

Inventory of Ocular Pulse Amplitude Values in Healthy Subjects and Patients With Ophthalmologic Illnesses: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Many studies have examined the ocular pulse amplitude (OPA) to better understand its physiology and clinical relevance, but the papers are scattered, not consistently indexed, and sometimes difficult to locate. We aimed to identify and summarize the relevant published evidence on OPA and, in a meta-analysis, outline specific differences of this parameter between healthy individual, primary open-angle glaucoma, normal-tension glaucoma, ocular hypertension, and cataract patients.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A thorough literature search and data extraction were conducted by 2 reviewers independently. Reports on OPA measured by the dynamic contour tonometry in conjunction with different ocular and systemic diseases or potential influencing factors were included.

RESULTS

Of the 527 initially found reports, 97 met the inclusion criteria assessing 31 clinical conditions. A meta-analysis based on 6850 eyes and 106 study arms (68.8%) revealed differences in mean OPA values in millimeters of mercury between various entities. Among healthy eyes, the OPA was 2.58 mm Hg (95% CI: 2.45-2.71), whereas OPA values were higher in glaucoma (unspecified glaucoma 2.73 mm Hg, 95% CI: 2.38-3.08; normal-tension glaucoma 2.66 mm Hg, 95% CI: 2.36-2.97; and primary open-angle glaucoma 2.92 mm Hg, 95% CI: 2.75-3.08). Although ocular hypertension showed the highest OPA values (3.53 mm Hg, 95% CI: 3.05-4.01), the lowest values were found in cataract eyes (2.26 mm Hg, 95% CI: 1.57-2.94).

CONCLUSION

We found different OPA values characteristic of different clinical entities, with above-normal values in glaucoma and ocular hypertension and lower values in cataract patients. Our work is intended for clinicians and researchers who want to get a quick overview of the available evidence or who need statistical data on OPA distributions in individual diseases.

Ocular pulse amplitude (OPA) in canine ADAMTS10-open-angle glaucoma (ADAMTS10-OAG)

Introduction: The role of ocular rigidity and biomechanics remains incompletely understood in glaucoma, including assessing an individual's sensitivity to intraocular pressure (IOP). In this regard, the clinical assessment of ocular biomechanics represents an important need. The purpose of this study was to determine a possible relationship between the G661R missense mutation in the ADAMTS10 gene and the ocular pulse amplitude (OPA), the difference between diastolic and systolic intraocular pressure (IOP), in a well-established canine model of open-angle glaucoma (OAG). Methods: Animals studied included 39 ADAMTS10-mutant dogs with different stages of OAG and 14 unaffected control male and female dogs between 6 months and 12 years (median: 3.2 years). Dogs were sedated intravenously with butorphanol tartrate and midazolam HCl, and their IOPs were measured with the Icare® Tonovet rebound tonometer. The Reichert Model 30™ Pneumotonometer was used to measure OPA. Central corneal thickness (CCT) was measured via Accutome® PachPen, and A-scan biometry was assessed with DGH Technology Scanmate. All outcome measures of left and right eyes were averaged for each dog. Data analysis was conducted with ANOVA, ANCOVA, and regression models. Results: ADAMTS10-OAG-affected dogs displayed a greater IOP of 23.0 ± 7.0 mmHg (mean ± SD) compared to 15.3 ± 3.6 mmHg in normal dogs (p < 0.0001). Mutant dogs had a significantly lower OPA of 4.1 ± 2.0 mmHg compared to 6.5 ± 2.8 mmHg of normal dogs (p < 0.01). There was no significant age effect, but OPA was correlated with IOP in ADAMTS10-mutant dogs. Conclusion: The lower OPA in ADAMTS10-mutant dogs corresponds to the previously documented weaker and biochemically distinct posterior sclera, but a direct relationship remains to be confirmed. The OPA may be a valuable clinical tool to assess ocular stiffness and an individual's susceptibility to IOP elevation.

Evaluation of ocular pulse amplitude in non-arteritic anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the ocular pulse amplitude (OPA) in patients with chronic non-arteritic anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy (NAION).

METHODS

This cross-sectional study comprised a study group of 30 eyes from 30 patients with NAION and a control group of 31 eyes from 31 age and gender-matched healthy subjects. Bilateral OPA was measured with dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) and was compared between the study and control groups.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference was found between the study and control groups in terms of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, ischaemic heart disease and hyperlipidemia. The mean intraocular pressure (IOP) measured with Goldmann Applanation Tonometry and DCT in the study and control groups was not statistically different (p₁ = 0.094, p₂ = 0.240). The mean OPA in the study group and the control group were 2.01 ± 0.69 mmHg and 1.97 ± 0.68 mmHg (p = 0.839).

CONCLUSION

No significant difference was determined in the OPA levels of eyes with NAION at the chronic stage and eyes in the control group.

Comparison of Ocular Pulse Amplitude-Lowering Effects of Tafluprost and Latanoprost by Dynamic Contour Tonometry

PURPOSE

A prospective study was performed to compare the ocular pulse amplitude (OPA)-lowering effects of tafluprost and latanoprost, used in the treatment of glaucoma, using dynamic contour tonometry.

METHODS

The study population consisted of patients with normal-tension glaucoma (NTG) (n = 27) or primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) (n = 14) treated with tafluprost and latanoprost. All patients were newly diagnosed with NTG and POAG and had undergone no previous treatment. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), OPA was measured by dynamic contour tonometry, and corrected OPA (cOPA) was calculated before and after 1 week, 1-3 months of treatment.

RESULTS

Initial IOP and OPA were 17.12 ± 3.75, 2.30 ± 0.56 mmHg and 17.53 ± 2.87, 2.65 ± 0.94 mmHg in the tafluprost and latanoprost groups, respectively. After 3 months of treatment, IOP and OPA were 13.00 ± 2.04 mmHg (24.1%) and 1.51 ± 0.30 mmHg (34.3%), respectively, in the tafluprost group. These values were 15.40 ± 2.32 mmHg (12.2%) and 2.08 ± 0.83 mmHg (21.5%), respectively, in the latanoprost group. Therefore, tafluprost significantly reduced IOP (P = 0.01), but OPA-lowering effects did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (P = 0.17). However, the cOPA-lowering effect of tafluprost (1.27 mmHg, 55.2%) was significantly greater than that of latanoprost (0.84 mmHg, 31.7%) after 3 months of treatment (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Tafluprost and latanoprost, used to treat glaucoma, have marked OPA-lowering effects as well as IOP-lowering effects. Moreover, tafluprost has a greater effect than latanoprost. Therefore, it can be used for patients in need of IOP reduction and at risk of glaucoma progression.

Ocular pulse amplitude and Doppler waveform analysis in glaucoma patients

PURPOSE

To determine the correlation between ocular blood flow velocities and ocular pulse amplitude (OPA) in glaucoma patients using colour Doppler imaging (CDI) waveform analysis.

METHOD

A prospective, observer-masked, case-control study was performed. OPA and blood flow variables from central retinal artery and vein (CRA, CRV), nasal and temporal short posterior ciliary arteries (NPCA, TPCA) and ophthalmic artery (OA) were obtained through dynamic contour tonometry and CDI, respectively. Univariate and multiple regression analyses were performed to explore the correlations between OPA and retrobulbar CDI waveform and systemic cardiovascular parameters (blood pressure, blood pressure amplitude, mean ocular perfusion pressure and peripheral pulse).

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety-two patients were included [healthy controls: 55; primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG): 74; normal-tension glaucoma (NTG): 63]. OPA was statistically different between groups (Healthy: 3.17 ± 1.2 mmHg; NTG: 2.58 ± 1.2 mmHg; POAG: 2.60 ± 1.1 mmHg; p < 0.01), but not between the glaucoma groups (p = 0.60). Multiple regression models to explain OPA variance were made for each cohort (healthy: p < 0.001, r = 0.605; NTG: p = 0.003, r = 0.372; POAG: p < 0.001, r = 0.412). OPA was independently associated with retrobulbar CDI parameters in the healthy subjects and POAG patients (healthy CRV resistance index: β = 3.37, CI: 0.16-6.59; healthy NPCA mean systolic/diastolic velocity ratio: β = 1.34, CI: 0.52-2.15; POAG TPCA mean systolic velocity: β = 0.14, CI 0.05-0.23). OPA in the NTG group was associated with diastolic blood pressure and pulse rate (β = -0.04, CI: -0.06 to -0.01; β = -0.04, CI: -0.06 to -0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Vascular-related models provide a better explanation to OPA variance in healthy individuals than in glaucoma patients. The variables that influence OPA seem to be different in healthy, POAG and NTG patients.

Correlation between ocular perfusion pressure and ocular pulse amplitude in glaucoma, ocular hypertension, and normal eyes

Background

The purpose of this study was to investigate the correlation between ocular perfusion pressure and ocular pulse amplitude in glaucoma, ocular hypertension, and normal eyes.

Methods

Ninety eyes from 90 patients were included. Thirty patients had been recently diagnosed with glaucoma and had no previous history of treatment for ocular hypotension, 30 had elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) without evidence of glaucoma, and 30 had normal IOP (<21 mmHg) with no detectable glaucomatous damage. Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), blood pressure measurement, pachymetry, Humphrey visual field, and routine ophthalmic examination was performed in each patient. Ocular perfusion pressure was calculated as the difference between mean arterial pressure and IOP. The ocular pulse amplitude was given by DCT. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to compare the glaucomatous and ocular hypertensive groups, and comparisons with the normal IOP group were done using the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient.

Results

Mean IOP by DCT was 22.7 ± 4.3 mmHg in the glaucoma group, 22.3 ± 2.8 mmHg in the ocular hypertension group, and 14.3 ± 1.6 mmHg in the control group. Mean IOP by GAT was 19.0 ± 5.1 mmHg for glaucoma, 22.4 ± 2.1 mmHg for ocular hypertension, and 12.9 ± 2.2 mmHg for controls. Mean ocular pulse amplitude was 3.4 ± 1.2 mmHg in the glaucoma group, 3.5 ± 1.2 mmHg in the ocular hypertension group, and 2.6 ± 0.9 mmHg in the control group. Mean ocular perfusion pressure was 46.3 ± 7.9 mmHg in the glaucoma group, 46.3 ± 7.9 mmHg in the ocular hypertension group, and 50.2 ± 7.0 mmHg in controls. No significant correlation between ocular perfusion pressure and ocular pulse amplitude was found in any of the groups (P = 0.865 and r = −0.032, P = 0.403 and r = −0.156, P = 0.082 and ρ = −0.307 for glaucoma, ocular hypertension, and normal eyes, respectively).

Conclusion

There is no significant correlation between ocular perfusion pressure and ocular pulse amplitude values in glaucoma, ocular hypertension, or normal eyes. IOP values measured by GAT correlate with those measured by DCT.