Page 63 - CJO_F17_GLAUCOMA_SUPPLEMENT

MANAGING OPEN ANGLE GLAUCOMA

REFERENCES

1. Quigley HA, Broman AT. The number of people with glaucoma gression. Surv Ophthalmol. 2008;53(6):S3-S10.
worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90(3):262-267. 23. Sommer A, Tielsch JM, Katz J, et al. Racial differences in the cause-
2. Resnikoff S, Pascolini D, Etya’Ale D, et al. Global data on vi- specific prevalence of blindness in east baltimore. N Engl J Med.
sual impairment in the year 2002. Bull World Health Organ. 1991;325(20):1412-1417.
2004;82(11):844-851. 24. He M, Foster PJ, Ge J, et al. Gonioscopy in adult chinese: The liwan
3. Foster PJ, Buhrmann R, Quigley HA, Johnson GJ. The definition eye study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47(11):4772-4779.
and classification of glaucoma in prevalence surveys. Br J Ophthal- 25. Tumbocon JAJ, Latina MA. Angle recession glaucoma. Int Ophthal-
mol. 2002;86(2):238-242. mol Clin. 2002;42(3):69-78.
4. Vijaya L, George R, Paul PG, et al. Prevalence of open-angle glau- 26. Kersey J, Broadway D. Corticosteroid-induced glaucoma: A review
coma in a rural south indian population. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. of the literature. Eye. 2006;20(4):407-416.
2005;46(12):4461-4467. 27. Zhao D, Cho J, Kim MH, Friedman DS, Guallar E. Diabetes, fasting
5. Cruess AF, Gordon KD, Bellan L, Mitchell S, Pezzullo ML. The cost glucose, and the risk of glaucoma: A meta-analysis. Ophthalmology.
of vision loss in canada. 2. results. Canadian Journal of Ophthalmol- 2015;122(1):72-78.
ogy/Journal canadien d’ophtalmologie. 2011;46(4):315-318. 28. Shi Y, Liu P, Guan J, Lu Y, Su K. Association between glaucoma and
6. Iskedjian M, Walker J, Vicente C, et al. Cost of glaucoma in canada: obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: A meta-analysis and systematic
Analyses based on visual field and physician’s assessment. J Glau- review. PloS one. 2015;10(2):e0115625.
coma. 2003;12(6):456-462. 29. Memarzadeh F, Ying-Lai M, Chung J, Azen SP, Varma R. Blood
7. Al Ali A, Hallingham S, Buys YM. Workforce supply of eye care pro- pressure, perfusion pressure, and open-angle glaucoma: The los
viders in canada: Optometrists, ophthalmologists, and subspecialty angeles latino eye study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51(6):2872-
ophthalmologists. Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology/Journal 2877.
Canadien d’Ophtalmologie. 2015;50(6):422-428. 30. Buys YM, Harasymowycz P, Gaspo R, et al. Comparison of
8. Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, et al. The ocular hypertension newly diagnosed ocular hypertension and open-angle glaucoma:
treatment study: Baseline factors that predict the onset of primary Ocular variables, risk factors, and disease severity. J Ophthalmol.
open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(6):714-720. 2012;2012:757106.
9. Tielsch JM, Katz J, Singh K, et al. A population-based evaluation 31. Marcus MW, de Vries MM, Montolio FGJ, Jansonius NM. Myopia
of glaucoma screening: The baltimore eye survey. Am J Epidemiol. as a risk factor for open-angle glaucoma: A systematic review and
1991;134(10):1102-1110. meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2011;118(10):1989-1994. e2.
10. Klein BE, Klein R, Sponsel WE, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma: The 32. Salmon JF. Predisposing factors for chronic angle-closure glau-
beaver dam eye study. Ophthalmology. 1992;99(10):1499-1504. coma. Prog Retin Eye Res. 1999;18(1):121-132.
11. European glaucoma society terminology and guidelines for glau- 33. Chang EE, Goldberg JL. Glaucoma 2.0: Neuroprotection, neurore-
coma, 4th edition - chapter 3: Treatment principles and options- generation, neuroenhancement. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(5):979-
Supported by the EGS foundation: Part 1: Foreword; introduction; 986.
glossary; chapter 3 treatment principles and options. Br J Ophthal- 34. Chauhan BC, Mikelberg FS, Balaszi AG, LeBlanc RP, Lesk MR,
mol. 2017;101(6):130-195. Trope GE. Canadian glaucoma study: 2. risk factors for the progres-
12. Leske MC, Wu S, Hennis A, Honkanen R, Nemesure B, BESs Study sion of open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(8):1030-
Group. Risk factors for incident open-angle glaucoma: The barba- 1036.
dos eye studies. Ophthalmology. 2008;115(1):85-93. 35. Mitchell P, Smith W, Attebo K, Healey PR. Prevalence of open-angle
13. Leske MC, Heijl A, Hussein M, et al. Factors for glaucoma progres- glaucoma in australia: The blue mountains eye study. Ophthalmol-
sion and the effect of treatment. Evidence-Based Ophthalmology. ogy. 1996;103(10):1661-1669.
2003;4(3):134-136. 36. Jonas JB, Budde W, Stroux A, Oberacher-Velten IM, Jünemann A.
14. Leske MC, Heijl A, Hussein M, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Komaroff E. Single intraocular pressure measurements and diurnal intraocular
Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: The pressure profiles. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;139(6):1136-1137.
early manifest glaucoma trial. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121(1):48-56. 37. Levine RA, Demirel S, Fan J, Keltner JL, Johnson CA, Kass MA.
15. Agis Investigators. The advanced glaucoma intervention study Asymmetries and visual field summaries as predictors of glaucoma
(AGIS): 7. the relationship between control of intraocular pressure in the ocular hypertension treatment study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis
and visual field deterioration. the AGIS investigators. Am J Ophthal- Sci. 2006;47(9):3896-3903.
mol. 2000;130:429-440. 38. Caprioli J, Coleman AL. Intraocular pressure fluctuation: A risk
16. Tham Y, Li X, Wong TY, Quigley HA, Aung T, Cheng C. Global factor for visual field progression at low intraocular pressures
prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden in the advanced glaucoma intervention study. Ophthalmology.
through 2040: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmol- 2008;115(7):1123-1129. e3.
ogy. 2014;121(11):2081-2090. 39. Spaeth GL, Reddy SC. Imaging of the optic disk in caring for
17. Heijl A, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Leske MC, Early Manifest patients with glaucoma: Ophthalmoscopy and photography remain
Glaucoma Trial Group. Natural history of open-angle glaucoma. the gold standard. Surv Ophthalmol. 2014;59(4):454-458.
Ophthalmology. 2009;116(12):2271-2276. 40. Reis AS, Toren A, Nicolela MT. Clinical optic disc evaluation in
18. Collaborative Normal-Tension Glaucoma Study Group. Natural his- glaucoma. European Ophthalmic Review. 2012;6(2):92-97.
tory of normal-tension glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2001;108(2):247- 41. Fingeret M, Medeiros FA, Susanna R, Weinreb RN. Five rules to
253. evaluate the optic disc and retinal nerve fiber layer for glaucoma.
19. Group, Collaborative Normal-Tension Glaucoma Study. Comparison Optometry-Journal of the American Optometric Association.
of glaucomatous progression between untreated patients with nor- 2005;76(11):661-668.
mal-tension glaucoma and patients with therapeutically reduced 42. Caprioli J, Garway-Heath DF, International Glaucoma Think
intraocular pressures. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;126(4):487-497. Tank. A critical reevaluation of current glaucoma management:
20. Hollands H, Johnson D, Hollands S, Simel DL, Jinapriya D, Sharma International glaucoma think tank, july 27-29, 2006, taormina, sicily.
S. Do findings on routine examination identify patients at risk for Ophthalmology. 2007;114(11 Suppl):S1-41.
primary open-angle glaucoma?: The rational clinical examination 43. Garway-Heath DF, Ruben ST, Viswanathan A, Hitchings RA.
systematic review. JAMA. 2013;309(19):2035-2042. Vertical cup/disc ratio in relation to optic disc size: Its value
21. Meier KL, Greenfield DS, Hilmantel G, et al. Special commentary: in the assessment of the glaucoma suspect. Br J Ophthalmol.
Food and drug administration and american glaucoma society 1998;82(10):1118-1124.
co-sponsored workshop: The validity, reliability, and usability of 44. Varma R, Steinmann WC, Scott IU. Expert agreement in evaluating
glaucoma imaging devices. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(11):2116-2123. the optic disc for glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1992;99(2):215-221.
22. Coleman AL, Miglior S. Risk factors for glaucoma onset and pro- 45. Harizman N, Oliveira C, Chiang A, et al. The ISNT rule and dif-

CANADIAN JOURNAL of OPTOMETRY | REVUE CANADIENNE D’OPTOMÉTRIE VOL. 79 SUPPLEMENT 1, 2017 63