Anterior Segment Optical Biometric Parameters and Refractive Errors in a Sample of Iraqi Population View PDF

*Hussein A Al Hammami
Department Of Ophthalmology, Medical College, University Of Kufa, Najaf, Iraq

*Corresponding Author:
Hussein A Al Hammami
Department Of Ophthalmology, Medical College, University Of Kufa, Najaf, Iraq
Email:hussein.alhammami@uokufa.edu.iq

Published on: 2020-06-06

Abstract

Background: There are few population-based age norms for refraction and ocular biometry in Iraqi population, and the anterior segment parameters are of paramount importance in the prediction of liability of person to primary angle closure glaucoma, and this study tries to explore any relation of anterior segment parameters and refractive errors in a sample of Iraqi population.
Objective: define the of anterior segment biometric parameters in a sample of Iraqi population with refractive errors and to find the correlation between those parameters and refractive errors.
Patients and Methods: In a cross sectional study 371 patients in whom the refractive errors were measured with subjective and objective measures the mean for myopia in male was -4.66±4.86 D and 5.31±4.86 D in female the mean for hyperopia +1.94±2.07 D and 1.74±1.84 D for male and female respectively.
The anterior chamber angle, depth and K-readings were measured by Pentacam® (Oculus, HG, Germany), Examination of the anterior segment using slit lamp and fundoscopy using Volk 90 D were done to exclude any underlying pathology manifest and cycloplegic refraction done by both auto refractometer (Topcon ker. 800) and retinoscopy.
Results: 371 patients (742 eyes), mean age 29.48 ±7.33, myopia presented in 311 and hypermetropia in 60.

  • There is an increase in anterior chamber angle width in myopia and decreased width in hyperopia.
  • There is an increase in AC angle width when increased corneal curvature and vice versa.
  • Positive correlation between ACA width and AC depth.
  • The anterior chamber depth increased in myopia and decreased in hypermetropia.

Keywords

Anterior Chamber Angle; Anterior Chamber Depth; Optical Coherence Tomography; Myopia; Hypermetropia

Introduction

Anterior chamber angle and depth have been identified as an important risk factor for angle-closure glaucoma and progression of open-angle glaucoma. For almost a century, gonioscopy has been used to semi quantitatively analyze anterior chamber angle width [1-5]. More recently, quantitative imaging modalities including ultrasound bio microscopy, optical coherence tomography, and Scheimpflug imaging have been developed. In contrast to ultrasound bio microscopy, optical coherence tomography and Scheimpflug imaging offer noncontact imaging of the anterior segment and make these methods attractive for patients and doctors alike [6-15]. To interpret measurements from Scheimpflug imaging and to integrate the results into a clinical context, it is important to know the distribution of anterior chamber angle width and to understand associations with clinical factors. The underlying idea is that a narrower anterior chamber angle width is associated with clinically suspicious risk factors for acute angle closure, namely female sex, older age, hyperopic refraction, shorter axial length, and thicker crystalline lens. Preliminary methodology of thinking regarding the relation of refractive errors with state of anterior segment parameters including anterior chamber depth is not fully investigated in clinical studies, the idea of wider angle in myopic eye and vice versa in hypermetropic eye is based mainly on theoretical assumption of longer and shorter axial length of the globe in myope and hypermetrope respectively [16-18].

Aim of Study

To find the relation between the ACA width and other anterior segment parameters with refractive error.

Patients and Methods

The study was carried out at Ibsar Eye center in AL-Najaf city from January 2017 to September 2018.

In a cross sectional study 371 (742 eyes) patients in whom the refractive errors were measured with a subjective and objective measures. The mean for myopia in male was -4.66±4.86 D and -5.31±4.86 D in females the mean for hyperopia + 1.94±2.07 D and 1.74±1.84 D for male and female respectively. The mean of myopic astigmatism 1.59±1.24 while hyperopic astigmatism 1.10±0.76.

The anterior chamber angle, depth and K-readings were measured by Oculus Pentacam and anterior segment Scheimpflug imaging.

Examination of the anterior segment using slit lamp and fundoscopy using volk 90 D were done to exclude any underlying pathology. Data was collected and included in a data based system and analyzed by statistical package of social sciences ((SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA)) version 20.

Parametric data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD). It was analyzed statistically using student t-test and ANOVA test.

While non-parametric data were expressed as percentages and were analyzed using chi square. The Pearson correlation coefficients (r) were used to study the correlation between age and anterior chamber depth of eyes. Significance was set at the P ≤ 0.05 level in all analyses.

Results

A cross sectional study enrolled 371patients, Mean age 29.48±7.33 years, myopia presented in 311 (83.8%) and hyperopia in 60 (16.2%). The mean of anterior chamber depth of right eye 3.2± 0.39 and left eye 3.1±0.42. K reading for right eye, mean of anterior surface of cornea 43.6±3.02 and posterior surface -6.2±0.8, while in left eye K reading mean for anterior surface of cornea 43.6±1.9 and posterior surface -6.3±7.9. Male to female ratio 1:1.6, male constitute 46.1% and female 53.9% as in table 1.

Table 1: Gender distribution.

 

 

No.

Percent

Sex

Male

171

46.1

Female

200

53.9

Total

371

100

Out 371 of patients, 36.1% in age group 18-25 years, 41.5% in age group 26-35 years and 22.4% of patient age ≥36 years as in figure 1.

There were no association between gender and age group distribution in sample, 35% of male in age group 18-25 years while female 37% in same age group, 43.8% of male in age groups 26-35 years, in female sample 39.5% in these age group, as shown in table 2.

Table 2: Age comparison with gender.

 

Age groups

Total

 

18-25 y

26-35 y

≥36 y

p-value

Ex

Male

60 (35%)

75 (43.8%)

36 (21.2%)

171

0.63

Female

74 (37%)

79 (39.5%)

47 (23.5%)

200

Total

134

154

83

371

 

In table 3 show the difference in measurement of anterior chamber width of two eyes in different age groups, there were significant difference between measurement of anterior chamber angle of right and left eye with age groups of patients, there were decrease in mean of angle width of left and right eye with increase age.

Table 3: Show the comparison between age group by mean and standard deviation of angle width.

Age group

No.

Angle width RT eye

Angle width LT eye

18-25 y

134

41.31±5.72

41.4±5.9

26-35y

154

39.8±6.15

39.76±7.2

≥36y

83

38.47±6.76

38.5±6.74

p-value

0.003

0.01

In table 4 show the difference in measurement of anterior chamber depth of two eyes and K reading of both anterior and posterior surface in different age groups, there were significant difference between measurement of anterior chamber depth of right and left eye with age with p-value < 0.001. On other hand the difference not significant in mean of K reading of anterior and posterior surface of cornea with age.

Table 4: show the comparison between age group by mean and standard deviation of refraction measurement.

Age group

No.

RT eye ACD

LT eye   ACD

K reading RT eye anterior

K reading LT eye anterior

K reading

RT eye

posterior

K reading LT eye

posterior

18-25 y

134

3.29±0.8

3.2±0.8

43.4±3.9

43.6±1.9

-6.1±1.1

-6.1±1.2

26-35y

154

3.20±0.3

3.1±0.2

43.7±2.4

43.5±2.3

-6.3±0.7

-6.2±3.2

≥36y

83

3±0.8

3±0.7

44±2.1

43.8±1.7

-6±0.2

-6.2±6.7

p-value

0.001

0.001

0.91

0.75

0.31

0.72

The following result reveal the measurement of anterior chamber angle width of two eyes in relation to gender, there were no significant difference in these measurement in both eye with sex of patients, as shown in table 5.

Table 5: The difference between gender and ACA measurement.

 

Sex

No.

Mean± Std. Deviation

p-value

RT angle width

Male

171

39.96±6.104

0.21

Female

199

40.18±6.09

LT angle width

Male

171

40.16±7.26

0.47

Female

199

42.23±29.63

The anterior chamber angle width of both eyes were statistically different between myopia and hyperopia, as shown below myopia had wider anterior chamber angle than hyperopia patients, in myopia had mean of anterior chamber angle for left eye 41.1±6.7, and for right eye 40.9±5.53 in hyperopia for left eye 35.5±7.06 and right eye 35.6±7.19, as shown in table 6.

Table 6: Comparison of refraction error with anterior chamber angle width.

 

No.

Angle width RT

Angle width LT

Myopia

311

40.93±5.53

41.1±6.7

Hyperopia

60

35.66±7.19

35.57±7.06

p-value

0.001

0.001

There were positive correlation between anterior chamber angle width and depth of anterior chamber that is when increase in width of angle lead to increase in depth of anterior chamber of both eye, in left eye Pearson

Correlation coefficient r = 0.298, p<0.04 and in right eye Pearson correlation coefficient r = 0.457, p<0.01 as shown in table 7.

Table 7: Show the correlation between anterior chamber angle width and anterior chamber depth.

Variable

Pearson coefficient

p-value

RT anterior chamber angle width and RT anterior chamber depth

0.457

0.01

LT anterior chamber angle width and LT anterior chamber depth

0.298

0.04

In Consequently the correlation also present between mean of K reading of anterior and posterior surface of corneal curvature and width of angle of left and right eye, in left eye Pearson correlation coefficient r = 0.182, p<0.02 and in right eye Pearson correlation coefficient r = 0.154, p<0.003 as shown in table 8.

Table 8: Show the correlation between anterior chamber angle width and k reading.

Variable

 Pearson coefficient

p-value

RT anterior chamber angle width and RT k reading

0.154

0.003

LT anterior chamber angle width and LT K reading

0.182

0.02

Discussion

To our knowledge this is the first study to describe the anterior segment biometric parameters in population set of Iraqi community and analyze the distribution of the ACA width in evaluation of the relation with the refractive state of the eye [19-25].

We found a mean ACA width as measured with Scheimpflug imaging with a mean ACA 40.6°±12.27° with a range from 20.2° to 55.2° [26-35]. Previous studies reported similar values for the ACA width using Scheimpflug imaging in a smaller cohort and optical coherence tomography.

Myopic refraction was associated with a wider ACA and this explain the high percentage of wider angle eyes in the sample size. Hyperopic refraction has been described as a risk factor for angle-closure glaucoma.

Associated with the narrower angle. However, several other studies incorporating ocular parameters (e.g., axial length) in their statistical models were not able to confirm this association [36-45].

The ACA was independently associated with a shallower anterior chamber, as previously reported by other groups. This was similar to observations in patients with angle-closure glaucoma, who tend to have a shallower anterior chamber and a thicker crystalline lens [46-50].

Primary glaucoma affects 67 million people worldwide, the Asians accounting for almost half of this number. Primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG) is a major cause of visual morbidity in East Asia. Recent studies in southern India found that the prevalence of PACG in Indians is also higher than that seen in European people, with rates approaching those seen in Mongolia [51-55]. The high prevalence of angle closure in China and India means that PACG may be at least as common as primary open-angle glaucoma and therefore a major form of glaucoma worldwide. Eyes with primary angle closure tend to share certain biometric characteristics. These include shallow central anterior chamber depth (ACD), thick lens, anterior lens position, small corneal diameter and radius of curvature, and short axial length. Among these, shallow ACD is regarded as the cardinal risk factor in most ethnic groups, although comparative studies suggest that this may not be true for East Asian people, where the role of non–pupil-block angle closure in relatively deep anterior chambers has been debated.

The prevalence of myopia has been increased over the past few decades, especially in East Asians. Among Singaporean adults aged over 40 years, the overall prevalence of myopia was reported to be 38.7%. Such a trend was even prominent in the younger generations. In the sequential nationwide surveys conducted in Taiwan, the prevalence of myopia among the teenagers between 16 and 18 years has increased from 74% in 1983 to 84% in 2000. In addition, the prevalence of myopia in freshmen at National Taiwan University reached 91.3% in 2005.

Corneal shape was also linked to ACA width. A flatter cornea was associated with narrower ACA. This is in concordance with a report in Chinese showing an independent negative association with the ACA and central corneal thickness [56-60].

The main factor was anterior chamber depth. Presumably, genetic variations between Caucasians and Asians contribute to different ocular geometry and its relation to angle-closure glaucoma. In Asians, almost one-quarter of angle-closure patients are myopic, while in a multiethnic population, patients with angle-closure were far more hyperopic [61-64].

Other German study sample was recruited from 5 years follow up Gutenburg Health (GHS) cohort study including subject with an age 40 to 79 years, the statistical analysis reveal an independently association between a smaller ACA.

And female sex, higher age, and more hyperopic refraction. When including biometric parameter, shallow anterior chamber depth, shorter axial length, higher central corneal thickness( CCT) and lower corneal power were independently associated with a narrower mean of +ACA width.

Conclusion

Presence of certain type of refractive errors (hypermetropia may predict for higher risk of angle closure or narrow angle glaucoma but not for all most of the myopic eyes (without other ocular abnormalities) is of very low risk of narrow angle glaucoma due to wider angle configuration.

References

  1. Kanski J, Bowling B (2015) Kanski Clinical Ophthalmology. (8th edtn), Elsevier, Netherlands.
  2. Pararajasegaram R (1999) VISION 2020-the Right to Sight: From Strategies to Action. Am J Ophthalmol 128: 359-360.
  3. Thylefors BA (1998) A global initiative for the elimination of avoidable blindness. Community Eye Health 125: 90-93.
  4. World Health Organization (2020) Elimination of avoidable blindness and launching of regional vision 2020. World Health Organization Regional Office for South-East Asia, New Delhi.
  5. Dandona R, Dandona L (2001) Refractive error blindness. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 79: 237-243.
  6. Foster PJ (2002) The epidemiology of primary angle closure and associated glaucomatous optic neuropathy. Semin Ophthalmol 17: 50-58.
  7. Matos AG, Asrani SG, Paula JS (2017) Feasibility of laser trabeculoplasty in angle closure glaucoma: a review of favourable histopathological findings in narrow angles. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 45: 632-639.
  8. Alsagoff Z, Aung T, Ang LP, Chew PT (2000) Long-term clinical course of primary angle-closure glaucoma in an Asian population. Ophthalmology 107: 2300-2304.
  9. Nolan WP, Foster PJ, Devereux JG, Uranchimeg D, Johnson GJ, et al. (2000) YAG laser iridotomy treatment for primary angle closure in east Asian eyes. Br J Ophthalmol 84: 1255-1259
  10. Alsbirk PH (1988) Early detection of primary angle-closure glaucoma. Limbal and axial chamber depth screening in a high risk population (Greenland Eskimos). Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 66: 556-564.
  11. Lavanya R, Baskaran M, Kumar RS, Wong HT, Chew PT, et al. (2012) Risk of acute angle closure and changes in intraocular pressure after pupillary dilation in Asian subjects with narrow angles. Ophthalmology 119: 474-480.
  12. Lavanya R, Foster PJ, Sakata LM, Friedman DS, Kashiwagi K, et al. (2008) Screening for narrow angles in the Singapore population: evaluation of new noncontact screening methods. Ophthalmology 115: 1720-1727.
  13. Prum BE, Herndon LW, Moroi SE, Mansberger SL, Stein JD, et al. (2016) Primary angle closure preferred practice Pattern® Ophthalmology 123: P1-P40.
  14. Yip JL, Foster PJ (2006) Ethnic differences in primary angle-closure glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 17: 175-180.
  15. Aung T, Nolan WP, Machin D, Seah SK, Baasanhu J, et al. (2005) Anterior chamber depth and the risk of primary angle closure in 2 East Asian populations. Arch Ophthalmol 123: 527-532.
  16. Lavanya R, Wong TY, Friedman DS, Aung HT, Alfred T, et al. (2008) Determinants of angle closure in older Singaporeans. Arch Ophthalmol 126: 686-691.
  17. Salmon JF, Mermoud A, Ivey A, Swanevelder SA, Hoffman M (1993) The prevalence of primary angle closure glaucoma and open angle glaucoma in Mamre, Western Cape, South Africa. Arch Ophthalmol 111: 1263-1269.
  18. Wojciechowski R, Congdon N, Anninger W, Broman AT (2003) Age, gender, biometry, refractive error, and the anterior chamber angle among Alaskan Eskimos. Ophthalmology 110: 365-375.
  19. Quigley HA (1996) Number of people with glaucoma worldwide. Br J Ophthalmol 80: 389- 393.
  20. Thylefors B, Negrel AD, Pararajasegaram R, Dadzie KY (1995) Global data on blindness. Bull World Health Organ 73: 115-121.
  21. Congdon N, Wang F, Tielsch JM (1992) Issues in the epidemiology and population-based screening of primary angle-closure glaucoma. Surv Ophthalmol 36: 411-423.
  22. Foster PJ, Baasanhu J, Alsbirk PH, Munkhbayar D, Uranchimeg D, et al. (1996) Glaucoma in Mongolia: a population-based survey in Hövsgöl province, northern Mongolia. Arch Ophthalmol 114: 1235-1241.
  23. Foster PJ, Oen FT, Machin D, Ng TP, Devereux JG, et al. (2000) The prevalence of glaucoma in Chinese residents of Singapore: a cross-sectional population survey in Tanjong Pagar district. Arch Ophthalmol 118: 1105-1111.
  24. Dandona L, Dandona R, Mandal P, Srinivas M, John RK, et al. (2000) Angle-closure glaucoma in an urban population in southern India: the Andhra Pradesh Eye Disease Study. Ophthalmology 107: 1710-1716.
  25. Jacob A, Thomas R, Koshi SP, Braganza A, Muliyil J (1998) Prevalence of primary glaucoma in an urban south Indian population. Indian J Ophthalmol 46: 81-86.
  26. Ramakrishnan R, Nirmalan PK, Krishnadas R, Thulasiraj RD, Tielsch JM, et al. (2003) Glaucoma in a rural population of southern India: the Aravind Comprehensive Eye Survey. Ophthalmology 110: 1484-1490.
  27. Alsbirk PH (1976) Primary angle-closure glaucoma: oculometry, epidemiology, and genetics in a high risk population. Acta Ophthalmol Suppl 127: 5-31.
  28. Lowe RF (1970) Aetiology of the anatomical basis for primary angle-closure glaucoma: biometrical comparisons between normal eyes and eyes with primary angle-closure glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 54: 161-169.
  29. Sihota R, Lakshmaiah NC, Agarwal HC, Pandey RM, Titiyal JS (2000) Ocular parameters in the subgroups of angle closure glaucoma. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 28: 253-258.
  30. Hung PT, Chou LH (1979) Provocation and mechanism of angle-closure glaucoma after iridectomy. Arch Ophthalmol 97: 1862-1864.
  31. Congdon NG, Youlin Q, Quigley H, Hung T, Wang TH, et al. (1997) Biometry and primary angle-closure glaucoma among Chinese, white and black populations. Ophthalmology 104: 1489-1495.
  32. Morgan IG, Ohno Matsui K, Saw SM (2012) Myopia. Lancet 379: 1739-1748.
  33. Matsumura H, Hirai H (1999) Prevalence of myopia and refractive changes in students from 3 to 17 years of age. Surv Ophthalmol 44: S109-S115.
  34. He M, Huang W, Zheng Y, Huang L, Ellwein LB (2007) Refractive error and visual impairment in school children in rural southern China. Ophthalmology 114: 374-382.
  35. Wong TY, Foster PJ, Hee J, Ng TP, Tielsch JM, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in adult Chinese in Singapore. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 41: 2486-2494.
  36. Lin LL, Shih YF, Hsiao CK, Chen CJ (2004) Prevalence of myopia in Taiwanese schoolchildren: 1983 to 2000. Ann Acad Med Singapore 33: 27-33.
  37. Wang TJ, Chiang TH, Wang TH, Lin LL, Shih YF (2009) Changes of the ocular refraction among freshmen in National Taiwan University between 1988 and 2005. Eye (Lond) 23: 1168-1169.
  38. Pan Z, Furuya T, Kashiwagi K (2012) Longitudinal changes in anterior chamber configuration in eyes with open-angle glaucoma and associated factors. J Glaucoma 21: 296-301.
  39. Scheie HG (1957) Width and pigmentation of the angle of the anterior chamber; a system of grading by gonioscopy. AMA Arch Ophthalmol 58: 510-512.
  40. Spaeth GL (1971) The normal development of the human anterior chamber angle: a new system of descriptive grading. Trans Ophthalmol Soc U K 91: 709-739.
  41. Shaffer RN (1962) Stereoscopic Manual of Gonioscopy. Mosby, United States.
  42. Friedman DS, Gazzard G, Min CB, Broman AT, Quigley H, et al. (2008) Age and sex variation in angle findings among normal Chinese subjects: a comparison of UBM, Scheimpflug, and gonioscopic assessment of the anterior chamber angle. J Glaucoma 17: 5-10.
  43. Orucoglu F, Akman M, Onal S (2015) Analysis of age, refractive error and gender related changes of the cornea and the anterior segment of the eye with Scheimpflug imaging. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 38: 245-350.
  44. Vossmerbaeumer U, Schuster AK, Fischer JE (2013) Width of anterior chamber angle determined by OCT and correlation to refraction and age in a German working population: the MIPH Eye&Health Study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 251: 2741-2746.
  45. Smith SD, Singh K, Lin SC, Chen PP, Chen TC, et al. (2013) Evaluation of the anterior chamber angle in glaucoma: a report by the American academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 120: 1985-1997.
  46. Höhn R, Kottler U, Peto T, Blettner M, Münzel T, et al. The ophthalmic branch of the Gutenberg Health Study: study design, cohort profile and self-reported diseases. PLoS One 10: e0120476.
  47. Rabsilber TM, Khoramnia R, Auffarth GU (2006) Anterior chamber measurements using Pentacam rotating Scheimpflug camera. J Cataract Refract Surg 32: 456-459.
  48. Xu L, Cao WF, Wang YX, Chen CX, Jonas JB (2008) Anterior chamber depth and chamber angle and their associations with ocular and general parameters: the Beijing Eye Study. Am J Ophthalmol 145: 929-936.
  49. Koc M, Ozulken K, Ayar O, Karakurt A (2013) Measurement of the anterior chamber angle according to quadrants and age groups using Pentacam Scheimpflug camera. J Glaucoma 22: 226-a229.
  50. Lowe RF (1970) Aetiology of the anatomical basis for primary angle-closure glaucoma. Biometrical comparisons between normal eyes and eyes with primary angle-closure glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 54: 161-169.
  51. Shen L, Melles RB, Metlapally R, Barcellos L, Schaefer C, et al. (2015) The association of refractive error with glaucoma in a multiethnic population. Ophthalmology 123: 92-101.
  52. Barkana Y, Dekel I, Goldich Y, Morad Y, Avni I, et al. (2012) Angle closure in Caucasians--a pilot general ophthalmology clinic-based study. J Glaucoma 21: 337-341.
  53. Kim YY, Lee JH, Ahn MD, Kim CY (2012) Angle closure in the Namil study in central South Korea. Arch Ophthalmol 130: 1177-1183.
  54. Senthil S, Garudadri C, Khanna RC, Sannapaneni K (2010) Angle closure in the Andhra Pradesh Eye Disease Study. Ophthalmology 117: 1729-1735.
  55. van Romunde SH, Thepass G, Lemij HG (2013) Is hyperopia an important risk factor for PACG in the Dutch population?-a case control study. J Ophthalmol 2013: 630481.
  56. Vijaya L, George R, Arvind H, Baskaran M, Paul PG, et al. (2006) Prevalence of angle-closure disease in a rural southern Indian population. Arch Ophthalmol 124: 403-409.
  57. Hashemi H, Khabazkhoob M, Mohazzab-Torabi S, Emamian MH, Shariati M, et al. (2015) Anterior chamber angle and anterior chamber volume in a 40-to 64-year-old population. Eye Contact Lens 42: 244-249.
  58. Fernández?Vigo JI, Fernández?Vigo JÁ, Macarro?Merino A, Fernández?Pérez C, Martínez?de?la?Casa JM, et al. (2016) Determinants of anterior chamber depth in a large Caucasian population and agreement between intra-ocular lens Master and Pentacam measurements of this variable. Acta Ophthalmol 94: e150-e155.
  59. Yazdani S, Akbarian S, Pakravan M, Doozandeh A, Afrouzifar M (2015) Biometric parameters in different stages of primary angle closure using low-coherence interferometry. Optom Vis Sci 92: 343-349.
  60. Shuai P, Yu M, Li X, Zhou Y, Liu X, et al. (2015) Genetic associations in PLEKHA7 and COL11A1 with primary angle closure glaucoma: a meta-analysis. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 43: 523-530.
  61. Yong KL, Gong T, Nongpiur ME, How AC, Lee HK, et al. (2014) Myopia in Asian subjects with primary angle closure: implications for glaucoma trends in East Asia. Ophthalmology 121: 1566-1571.
  62. Bedei A, Appolloni I, Madesani A, Pietrelli A, Franceschi S, et al. (2012) Repeatability and agreement of 2 Scheimpflug analyzers in measuring the central corneal thickness and anterior chamber angle, volume, and depth. Eur J Ophthalmol 22: S29-S32.
  63. Shankar H, Taranath D, Santhirathelagan CT, Pesudovs K (2008) Anterior segment biometry with the Pentacam: comprehensive assessment of repeatability of automated measurements. J Cataract Refract Surg 34: 103-113.
  64. Van Herick W, Shaffer RN, Schwartz A (1969) Estimation of width of angle of anterior chamber. Incidence and significance of the narrow angle. Am J Ophthalmol 68: 626-629.
scroll up