Purpose. To determine the presence and type of glaucoma in a cohort of adult Chinese subjects with systemic hypertension. Methods. This prospective cohort study included 200 hypertensive Chinese adults aged >40 years old who underwent screening via frequency doubling technology (FDT) perimetry and intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement by noncontact tonometry (NCT) in a general outpatient clinic. Those with ？mmHg and/or visual field (VF) defects on FDT were referred for complete ophthalmological examination. The diagnosis of glaucoma was based on an abnormal VF on Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) by Hodapp-Parrish-Anderson's criteria and an increased vertical cup-disc ratio (VCDR). Results. The mean age of the subjects was years, and the male:female ratio was 92？:？108. All patients were hypertensive with a mean blood pressure (BP) of ？mmHg whilst on systemic antihypertensive medication. Of the 111 patients that had an abnormal initial screening, 14 (7.9%) were confirmed to have glaucoma with the highest prevalence of normal tension glaucoma (NTG) (6.2%), followed by primary angle closure glaucoma (PACG) (1.1%) and primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) (0.5%). The positive predictive value of FDT perimetry was 71%. Conclusion. Nearly 8% of the adults with systemic hypertension had glaucoma, and NTG was the most prevalent type. 1. Introduction Glaucoma is a progressive optic neuropathy with characteristic changes in the optic nerve head and corresponding visual field loss. Currently, glaucoma accounts for 12% of all global blindness with 4.5 million people affected worldwide [1]. Primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) is more frequent in Caucasian and African populations whilst primary angle closure glaucoma (PACG) is more common in Asian ethnicity. Normal tension glaucoma (NTG) is especially prevalent in Japan and Korea [2–4]. Raised intraocular pressure (IOP) remains the most common and clinically modifiable risk factor. However, glaucomatous optic neuropathy can occur despite normal IOP as in NTG [5]. The role of vascular risk factors such as systemic blood pressure (BP) and ocular perfusion pressure, hypercoagulability, carotid artery disease, and vasospasm have been extensively studied, and it has been shown that abnormalities in systemic BP and ocular hypoperfusion are vital in the pathogenesis of NTG [6–10]. Speculations about the association of glaucoma and systemic hypertension still exist. Systemic hypertension has been found to be associated with glaucoma but hypoperfusion has been associated with the development and progression of NTG [8, 11]. The
A. Iwase, Y. Suzuki, M. Araie et al., “The prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma in Japanese: the Tajimi Study,” Ophthalmology, vol. 111, no. 9, pp. 1641–1648, 2004.
[3]
C. S. Kim, G. J. Seong, N. H. Lee, and K. C. Song, “Prevalence of primary open-angle Glaucoma in central South Korea: the Namil study,” Ophthalmology, vol. 118, no. 6, pp. 1024–1030, 2011.
[4]
M. A. Kass, “Normal-pressure glaucoma,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 125, no. 2, pp. 242–244, 1998.
[5]
S. M. Drance, V. P. Sweeney, R. W. Morgan, and F. Feldman, “Studies of factors involved in the production of low tension glaucoma,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 89, no. 6, pp. 457–465, 1973.
[6]
I. Goldberg, F. C. Hollows, M. A. Kass, and B. Becker, “Systemic factors in patients with low-tension glaucoma,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 56–62, 1981.
[7]
S. S. Hayreh, M. B. Zimmerman, P. Podhajsky, and W. L. M. Alward, “Nocturnal arterial hypotension and its role in optic nerve head and ocular ischemic disorders,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 117, no. 5, pp. 603–624, 1994.
[8]
S. Drance, D. R. Anderson, and M. Schulze, “Risk factors for progression of visual field abnormalities in normal-tension glaucoma,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 131, no. 6, pp. 699–708, 2001.
[9]
Z. He, A. J. Vingrys, J. A. Armitage, et al., “The role of blood pressure in glaucoma,” Clinical and Experimental Optometry, vol. 94, no. 2, pp. 133–149, 2011.
[10]
M. T. Nicolela, B. E. Walman, A. R. Buckley, and S. M. Drance, “Ocular hypertension and primary open-angle glaucoma: a comparative study of their retrobulbar blood flow velocity,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 308–310, 1996.
[11]
V. P. Costa, E. S. Arcieri, and A. Harris, “Blood pressure and glaucoma,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 93, no. 10, pp. 1276–1282, 2009.
[12]
E. Hodapp, R. K. Parrish II, and D. R. Anderson, Clinical Decisions in Glaucoma, The CV Mosby Co., St Louis, Mo, USA, 1993.
[13]
S. Wang, L. Xu, J. B. Jonas et al., “Major eye diseases and risk factors associated with systemic hypertension in an adult Chinese population. The Beijing eye study,” Ophthalmology, vol. 116, no. 12, pp. 2373–2380, 2009.
[14]
P. Mitchell, A. J. Lee, E. Rochtchina, and J. J. Wang, “Open-angle glaucoma and systemic hypertension: the blue mountains eye study,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 319–326, 2004.
[15]
M. Yanagi, R. Kawasaki, J. J. Wang, T. Y. Wong, J. Crowston, and Y. Kiuchi, “Vascular risk factors in glaucoma: a review,” Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 252–258, 2011.
[16]
O. S. Punjabi, R. L. Stamper, A. G. Bostrom, and S. C. Lin, “Does treated systemic hypertension affect progression of optic nerve damage in glaucoma suspects?” Current Eye Research, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 153–160, 2007.
[17]
J. M. Tielsch, J. Katz, A. Sommer, H. A. Quigley, and J. C. Javitt, “Hypertension, perfusion pressure, and primary open-angle glaucoma: a population-based assessment,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 113, no. 2, pp. 216–221, 1995.
[18]
M. C. Leske, S. Y. Wu, A. Hennis, R. Honkanen, and B. Nemesure, “Risk factors for incident open-angle glaucoma. The Barbados eye studies,” Ophthalmology, vol. 115, no. 1, pp. 85–93, 2008.
[19]
C. A. A. Hulsman, J. R. Vingerling, A. Hofman, J. C. M. Witteman, and P. T. V. M. De Jong, “Blood pressure, arterial stiffness, and open-angle glaucoma: the Rotterdam Study,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 125, no. 6, pp. 805–812, 2007.
[20]
H. A. Quigley, S. K. West, J. Rodriguez, B. Munoz, R. Klein, and R. Snyder, “The prevalence of glaucoma in a population-based study of Hispanic subjects: proyecto VER,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 119, no. 12, pp. 1819–1826, 2001.
[21]
M. T. Nicolela, B. E. Walman, A. R. Buckley, and S. M. Drance, “Ocular hypertension and primary open-angle glaucoma: a comparative study of their retrobulbar blood flow velocity,” Journal of Glaucoma, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 308–310, 1996.
[22]
M. He, P. J. Foster, J. Ge et al., “Prevalence and clinical characteristics of glaucoma in adult Chinese: a population-based study in Liwan District, Guangzhou,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 47, no. 7, pp. 2782–2788, 2006.
[23]
C. A. Johnson and S. J. Samuels, “Screening for glaucomatous visual field loss with frequency-doubling perimetry,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 413–425, 1997.
[24]
K. E. Cello, J. M. Nelson-Quigg, and C. A. Johnson, “Frequency doubling technology perimetry for detection of glaucomatous visual field loss,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 129, no. 3, pp. 314–322, 2000.
[25]
P. H. Artes, D. M. Hutchison, M. T. Nicoela, et al., “Threshold and variability properties of matrix frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma,” Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, vol. 46, no. 7, pp. 2451–2457, 2005.
[26]
J. Katz, A. Sommer, and K. Witt, “Reliability of visual field results over repeated testing,” Ophthalmology, vol. 98, no. 1, pp. 70–75, 1991.
[27]
A. Heijl, G. Lindgren, and J. Olsson, “The effect of perimetric experience in normal subjects,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 107, no. 1, pp. 81–86, 1989.
[28]
G. Marra and J. Flammer, “The learning and fatigue effect in automated perimetry,” Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 229, no. 6, pp. 501–504, 1991.
[29]
C. Hudson, J. M. Wild, and E. C. O'Neill, “Fatigue effects during a single session of automated static threshold perimetry,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 268–280, 1994.
[30]
A. Heijl and B. Bengtsson, “The effect of perimetric experience in patients with glaucoma,” Archives of Ophthalmology, vol. 114, no. 1, pp. 19–22, 1996.
[31]
J. Lamparter, A. Schulze, A. C. Schuff, M. Berres, N. Pfeiffer, and E. M. Hoffmann, “Learning curve and fatigue effect of flicker defined form perimetry,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 151, no. 6, pp. 1057–1064, 2011.
