Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Glaucoma staging is critical for treatment planning but has rarely been tested in severe/end-stage disease. We compared the performance of the Disc Damage Likelihood Scale (DDLS) and cup:disc ratio (CDR) using a functional glaucoma staging system (GSS) as the reference standard. METHODS:Post hoc analysis of a randomised controlled trial at the Eye Department of Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre, Tanzania. Eligible participants (aged ≥18 years) with open-angle glaucoma, intraocular pressure (IOP) of >21 mm Hg, were randomised to timolol 0.5% eye drops or selective laser trabeculoplasty. Fundoscopy established vertical and horizontal CDRs and DDLS. Visual acuity and static visual fields were graded (GSS). The study used area under the receiver operating characteristic (AROC) curves and Spearman's rank correlation coefficients to compare staging systems. Logistic regression with generalised estimating equations determined risk factors of functional severe/end-stage glaucoma. RESULTS:382 eyes (201 participants) were evaluated; 195 (51%) had severe or end-stage glaucoma; mean IOP was 26.7 (SD 6.9) mm Hg. DDLS yielded an AROC of 0.90 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.93), vertical cup:disc ratio (vCDR) of 0.88 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.91, p=0.048) for identifying severe/end-stage disease. Correlation coefficients comparing GSS to DDLS and vCDRs were 0.73 and 0.71, respectively. Advanced structural stages, vision impairment, higher IOP and less financial resources were risk factors of functional severe/end-stage glaucoma. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study indicates that both structural staging systems can differentiate severe/end-stage glaucoma from less severe disease, with a moderate advantage of DDLS over CDR. Clinical examination of the optic disc plays an important role in addition to functional assessment when managing severe/end-stage glaucoma.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of the study was to describe the rationale and design of Project FOREVER (Finding Ophthalmic Risk and Evaluating the Value of Eye exams and their predictive Reliability). DESIGN/METHODS:Project FOREVER will build a comprehensive database of clinical eye and vision data collected from ~280 000 adults at 100 optician stores across Denmark. The FOREVER database (FOREVERdb) includes detailed data from refraction, visual acuity, intraocular pressure, corneal thickness, visual field assessments and retinal fundus images. Linkage to the comprehensive Danish national registries with, that is diagnostic and prescribing data permits investigation of rare associations and risk factors. 30 000 individuals over 50 also provide a saliva sample for later genetic studies and blood pressure measurements. Of these 30 000, 10 000 will also get optical coherence tomography (OCT) nerve and retinal scans. This subpopulation data is reviewed by ophthalmologists for disease detection. All participants will be asked to complete a questionnaire assessing lifestyle, self-perceived eye health and general health. Enrolment of participants began in April 2022. PERSPECTIVE/CONCLUSIONS:The FOREVERdb is a powerful tool to answer a wide range of research questions that can pave the way for better eye health. This database will provide valuable insights for future studies investigating the correlations between eye and general health in a Danish population cohort, enabling research to identify potential risk factors for a range of diseases.

BACKGROUND/AIMS/OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to validate the Glaucoma Risk Stratification Tool (GLAUC-STRAT-fast) currently recommended by the Royal College of Ophthalmologists for the risk stratification of patients with glaucoma in the UK National Health Service Hospital Eye Service. METHODS:test for proportions. RESULTS:There was an association between the baseline stratification and the number of treatment escalations needed to maintain the eye-specific target intraocular pressure (p=0.001), the number of visits needed throughout the 3-year follow-up period (p=0.001), the need for trabeculectomy (p<0.001) and absolute loss of MD over the course of the monitoring period (p<0.001). The rate of VF progression was not associated with baseline risk stratification for TD or PD progression (p≥0.007, with Bonferroni correction). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The GLAUC-STRAT fast tool is a useful tool for risk stratifying eyes with ocular hypertension or open angle glaucoma. Further research is needed to confirm and validate its applicability to more advanced glaucomas and generalisability to clinical use. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER/BACKGROUND:The LiGHT trial is registered at controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN32038223).

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To compare visual field (VF) progression between glaucoma patients receiving cataract surgery alone (CS) or with a Hydrus microstent (CS-HMS). DESIGN/METHODS:Post hoc analysis of VF data from the HORIZON multicenter randomized controlled trial. METHODS:A total of 556 patients with glaucoma and cataract were randomized 2:1 to either CS-HMS (369) or CS (187) and followed up for 5 years. VF was performed at 6 months and then every year after surgery. We analyzed data for all participants with at least 3 reliable VFs (false positives < 15%). Average between-group difference in rate of progression (RoP) was tested using a Bayesian mixed model and a 2-sided Bayesian P value <.05 (main outcome). A multivariable model measured the effect of intraocular pressure (IOP). A survival analysis compared the probability of global VF sensitivity dropping by predefined cutoffs (2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 dB) from baseline. RESULTS:Data from 352 eyes in the CS-HMS arm and 165 in the CS arm were analyzed (2966 VFs). The mean RoP was -0.26 dB/y (95% credible interval -0.36, -0.16) for CS-HMS and -0.49 dB/y (95% credible interval -0.63, -0.34) for CS. This difference was significant (P = .0138). The difference in IOP only explained 17% of the effect (P < .0001). Five-year survival analysis showed an increased probability of VF worsening by 5.5 dB (P = .0170), indicating a greater proportion of fast progressors in the CS arm. CONCLUSIONS:CS-HMS has a significant effect on VF preservation in glaucoma patients compared with CS alone, reducing the proportion of fast progressors.

AIMS:To report the baseline intraocular pressure (IOP) characteristics and its diurnal fluctuation in the Laser in Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension China cohort. METHODS:622 primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) patients and 149 ocular hypertension (OHT) patients were recruited at Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center from 2015 to 2019. Standardised ocular examinations were performed including IOP measurement using the Goldmann applanation tonometer. Daytime phasing IOP was recorded at 8:00, 10:00, 11:30, 14:30, 17:00 hour. RESULTS:The mean baseline IOP was 20.2 mm Hg for POAG patients and 24.4 mm Hg for OHT. Multiple regression analysis revealed that thicker central corneal thickness (CCT) was correlated with higher IOP in both POAG and OHT. Male gender and younger age were correlated with higher IOP only for POAG. As for diurnal IOP fluctuation, mean IOP fluctuation was 3.4 mm Hg in POAG eyes and 4.4 mm Hg in OHT. The peak and trough IOP occurred at 8:00 and 14:30 hour in both POAG and OHT eyes. CONCLUSIONS:Younger age, male gender and thicker CCT are correlated to higher IOP in POAG patients while only thicker CCT is related to higher IOP in OHT patients. Peak IOP appears mostly at early morning or late afternoon and trough value occurs mostly at early afternoon.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Recent clinical trials in glaucoma have used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of health-related quality of life to evaluate interventions. However, existing PROMs may not be sufficiently sensitive to capture changes in health status. This study aims to determine what really matters to patients by directly exploring their treatment expectations and preferences. SUBJECTS/METHODS/METHODS:We conducted a qualitative study using one-to-one semi-structured interviews to elicit patients' preferences. Participants were recruited from two NHS clinics serving urban, suburban and rural populations in the UK. To be relevant across glaucoma patients under NHS care, participants were sampled to include a full range of demographic profiles, disease severities and treatment histories. Interview transcripts were evaluated using thematic analysis until no new themes emerged (saturation). Saturation was established when 25 participants with ocular hypertension, mild, moderate and advanced glaucoma had been interviewed. RESULTS:Themes identified were: Patients' experiences of living with glaucoma, patients' experiences of having glaucoma treatment, most important outcomes to patients, and COVID-related concerns. Participants specifically expressed their most important concerns, which were (i) disease-related outcomes (intraocular pressure control, maintaining vision, and being independent); and (ii) treatment-related outcomes (treatment that does not change, drop-freedom, and one-time treatment). Both disease-related and treatment-related experiences were covered prominently in interviews with patients across the spectrum of glaucoma severity. CONCLUSIONS:Outcomes related both to the disease and its treatment are important to patients with different severities of glaucoma. To accurately evaluate quality of life in glaucoma, PROMs may need to assess both disease-related and treatment-related outcomes.

PURPOSE:Surgical innovations are necessary to improve patient care. After an initial exploratory phase, novel surgical technique should be compared with alternative options or standard care in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, surgical RCTs have unique methodological challenges. Our study sought to investigate key aspects of the design, conduct, and reporting of RCTs of novel surgeries. DESIGN:Systematic review. METHODS:The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021253297). RCTs evaluating novel surgeries for cataract, vitreoretinal, glaucoma, and corneal diseases were included. Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched. The search period was January 1, 2016, to June 16, 2021. RESULTS:A total of 52 ophthalmic surgery RCTs were identified in the fields of glaucoma (n = 12), vitreoretinal surgery (n = 5), cataract (n = 19), and cornea (n = 16). A description defining the surgeon's experience or level of expertise was reported in 30 RCTs (57%) and was presented in both control and intervention groups in 11 (21%). Specification of the number of cases performed in the particular surgical innovation being assessed prior to the trial was reported in 10 RCTs (19%) and an evaluation of quality of the surgical intervention in 7 (13%). Prospective trial registration was recorded in 12 RCTs (23%) and retrospective registration in 13 (25%); and there was no registration record in the remaining 28 (53%) studies. CONCLUSIONS:Important aspects of the study design such as the surgical learning curve, surgeon's previous experience, quality assurance, and trial registration details were often missing in novel ophthalmic surgical procedures. The Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term follow-up (IDEAL) framework aims to improve the quality of study design.

Glaucoma is the leading cause of preventable sight loss in the United Kingdom and the provision of timely glaucoma care has been highlighted as a significant challenge in recent years. Following a recent high-profile investigation, The Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch recommended the validation of risk stratification models to safeguard the vision-related quality of life of glaucoma patients. There continues to be no nationally agreed evidence-based risk stratification model for glaucoma care across the United Kingdom. Some models have used simple measures of disease staging such as visual field mean deviation as surrogates for risk, but more refined, individualised risk stratification models should include factors related to both visual impairment and visual disability. Candidate tools should also incorporate both ocular and systemic co-morbidities, rate of disease progression, visual needs and driving status and undergo clinical refinement and validation to justify implementation. The disruption to routine glaucoma care caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has only highlighted the importance of such risk stratification models and has accelerated their development, application and evaluation. This review aims to critically appraise the available evidence underpinning current approaches for glaucoma risk stratification and to discuss how these may be applied to contemporary glaucoma care within the United Kingdom. Further research will be essential to justify and validate the utility of glaucoma risk stratification models in everyday clinical practice.