
Primer Açık Açılı Glokom, Oküler Hipertansiyon ve Normotansif Glokomlu Olgulardaki Pulsatil Oküler Kan Akımı Analizi
Author(s) -
... ...
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
türk oftalmoloji dergisi
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.654
H-Index - 10
eISSN - 2147-2661
pISSN - 1300-0659
DOI - 10.4274/tjo.42.25743
Subject(s) - primer (cosmetics) , biology , microbiology and biotechnology , physics , thermodynamics
Pur po se: To investigate the pulsatile ocular blood flow (POBF) levels in cases with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG), ocular\udhypertension (OHT) and normotensive glaucoma (NTG).\udMa te ri al and Met hod: Totally 99 eyes of 30 POAG (Group 1), 21 OHT (Group 2), 23 NTG (Group 3) and 25 control (Group 4)\udcases were included in this study. In all cases, intraocular pressure (IOP) and POBF levels were measured by ocular blood flow analyzer.\udDifferences between groups were analyzed statistically.\udRe sults: The mean ages of the groups were 54.37±8.05; 52.57±7; 52.26±6.08; and 51.96±10.28, respectively. While the average\udIOP levels of groups were 16.91±3.91; 24.05+2.11; 14.48±2.15; and 17.47±3.64 mmHg, respectively (p<0.0001), the mean POBF\udlevels of groups were 16.15±5.14; 16.64±4.06; 15.95±4.48; 20.11±4.12 μl/s, respectively (p=0.004). There was statistically\udsignificant difference for both IOP and POBF between Group 3 and Group 4. For only IOP, there was statistically significant difference\udbetween Group 1 and Group 3 as well as between Group 2 and Groups 1, 3 and 4. There was also significant difference for only POBF\udbetween Group 1 and Group 4. In the whole study group, POBF levels did not demonstrate a significant correlation with age and IOP\udlevels (p=0.39 and p=0.812, respectively).\udDis cus si on: The levels of POBF were found to be lower in cases with POAG and NTG compared to control cases. This finding\udsupports the vascular theory in glaucomatous optic nerve damage and can be used as a guide in the etiopathogenesis of glaucoma. (Turk\udJ Ophthalmol 2012; 42: 125-3