Ischemic index and distribution of retinal capillary non-perfusion in neovascular glaucoma
Charles DeBoer1,2, Brandon Wong1,2, Hossein Ameri1,2
1USC Roski Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, California, LA 90033, USA.
Introduction:
Neovascular Glaucoma (NVG) is a condition normally caused by hypoxic posterior ocular disease, which produces angiogenic factors such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) that stimulate new vessel proliferation of the anterior segment and angle, eventually leading to angle closure, reduced outflow of aqueous humor and increased intraocular pressure. Without treatment elevated intraocular pressure can rapidly progress to loss of vision. Treatment includes addressing the intraocular pressure and reducing the ischemic drive with panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) of the ischemic retina. Recent imaging advancements allow for ultra-widefield fluorescein angiography (UWFA) which expand the amount of peripheral retina that can be evaluated for non-perfusion. Here we aim to study patterns of non-perfusion in NVG using a group of PRP naïve patients with recent onset NVG.
Methods:
This study is a retrospective single-center cross-sectional study of patients seen at LAC + USC Medical Center from January 2015 to April 2020 with new onset NVG, without PRP and with UWFA completed. The percentage of ischemic index of the retina was calculated from the UWFA and evaluated in three distinct zones centered on the fovea: the posterior pole, the mid periphery, and far periphery. To increase sample size, a confirmatory group was included, with PRP allowed prior to UWFA but not before diagnosis. In addition, the time between diagnosis and UWFA was increased to 6 months.
Results:
A total of 11 eyes met inclusion criteria for the primary group. Ischemic index was found to be 91% in the far periphery, 77% in the mid periphery, and 42% at the posterior pole. The total average ischemic index was 76%. There was a statistically significant difference between the far periphery and posterior pole and mid periphery and posterior pole. A total of 24 eyes met criteria for the confirmatory group. Ischemic index for the confirmatory group was found to be 93% in the far periphery, 75% in the mid periphery, and 35% at the posterior pole. There was a statistically significant difference between the far periphery, posterior pole and mid-periphery.
Conclusion:
This knowledge can be used to further guide treatment and understand risk for NVG.
