Corneal Hysteresis as a Marker for Patients with Secondary Glaucoma

ABSTRACT

Purpose

To investigate and compare the association of corneal hysteresis (CH) in patients with secondary glaucoma to control patients and patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). Additionally, to determine the consistency of CH measurements in patients with secondary glaucoma.

Methods

A total of 84 patients (121 eyes) were prospectively included in this study. Twenty-three patients (46 eyes) were healthy controls, 24 patients (40 eyes) were diagnosed with POAG, and 27 patients (35 eyes) were diagnosed with a form of secondary glaucoma. CH and intraocular pressure (IOP) were measured using the Ocular Response Analyzer. Three measurements per eye were performed and used for the analysis and to determine fluctuations in CH data. One-way ANOVA with post-hoc Bonferroni analysis and Chi-Squared testing was done to determine differences between groups.

Results

All patients were matched for age. Patients in both POAG and secondary glaucoma groups were matched for age and IOP. All groups had similar sex and racial compositions as well as similar proportions of diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. CH was lower (p < .05) in patients with POAG (9.32 ± 1.64) and secondary glaucoma (7.89 ± 3.18) when compared to healthy controls (11.16 ± 1.60). Fluctuations in CH measurements were minimal in all groups. Further analysis of the secondary glaucoma group revealed no differences in CH between different types of secondary glaucoma (p > .05).

Conclusion

Patients with secondary glaucoma have lower CH when compared to POAG or control groups. The ORA exhibits precision of CH measurements for control, POAG, and secondary glaucoma groups, making it a reliable tool in management of secondary forms of glaucoma.

KEYWORDS:

• Corneal hysteresis
• intraocular pressure
• ocular response analyzer
• open-angle glaucoma
• primary secondary glaucoma

Discloure Statement

Disclosures for Albert S. Khouri: Grant support: Allergan, NJ Health Foundation, Fund for NJ Blind; Consultant: Glaukos, Bausch & Lomb, Alcon; Speaker Bureau: Allergan, Bausch & Lomb. The rest of the authors report no potential conflicts of interest.

Author Contributions

ASK was responsible for study conception and design. MO, AU, & HS were responsible for data collection. AU and MO were responsible for data analysis. MO was responsible for drafting the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants in the study.

Consent to publish

The authors affirm that human research participants provided informed consent for publication.

Ethics Approval

This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Institutional Review Board of the Rutgers New Jersey Medical School.

Additional information

Funding

No source of funding was used for this investigation.