Randomised controlled trial of screening and prophylactic treatment to prevent primary angle closure glaucoma.

AIMS: To determine if screening with an ultrasound A-scan and prophylactic treatment of primary angle closure (PAC) with laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI) can reduce the incidence of primary angle closure glaucoma (PACG) in Mongolia. METHODS: A single-masked randomised controlled trial was initiated in 1999. 4725 volunteer Mongolian participants ≥ 50 years old from the capital Ulaanbaatar or the rural province of Bayankhongor were recruited, of which 128 were excluded with glaucoma. 4597 were randomly allocated to the control, no-screening arm or screening with ultrasound central anterior chamber depth (cACD), with the cut-off set at < 2.53 mm. 685 screen-positive participants were examined and angle closure was identified by gonioscopy in 160, of which 156 were treated with prophylactic LPI. Primary outcome of incident PACG was determined using both structural and functional evidence from objective grading of paired disc photographs from baseline and follow-up, objective grading of follow-up visual fields and clinical examination. RESULTS: Six years later, 801 (17.42%) participants were known to have died, and a further 2047 (53.92%) were traced and underwent full ophthalmic examination. In an intention to treat analysis using available data, PACG was diagnosed in 33 participants (1.61%, 95% CI 1.11% to 2.25%), of which 19 were in the screened group and 14 in the non-screened group (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.60, p = 0.47), indicating no difference between groups. CONCLUSIONS: We were not able to identify a reduction in the 6 year incidence of PACG after screening with cACD < 2.53 mm and prophylactic treatment of PAC

Prophylactic laser peripheral iridotomy and cataract progression.

PURPOSE: To determine whether prophylactic laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI) for primary angle closure (PAC) is associated with cataract progression. METHODS: In 1999, Mongolian volunteers aged>or=50 years were invited to participate in a longitudinal study. Glaucoma was excluded in all participants and 712 of them were selected to undergo a full ophthalmic examination as part of the study protocol. Lenses were graded and PAC diagnosed using international classification systems. In 2005, all traced participants underwent a similar dilated examination. Diagnosis of cataract progression was based on the inter-observer variation +2 standard deviations. The association between LPI at baseline and cataract progression was assessed using chi2-test and logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 712 participants, 158 were diagnosed with occludable angles and treated with LPI. In 2005, 137 participants (19.2%) had died, 315 (315/575=54.8%) were traced, and dilated examination was performed on 276 (48%) of them. Progression of nuclear opacity (NO), cortical, and posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were evident in 40 (14.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI)=10.6-19.2%), 89 (32.2%, 95% CI=26.8-38.1%), and 11 participants (4.0%, 95% CI=2.0-7.0%), respectively. Although NO was more likely to progress in those with LPI in a crude analysis (odds ratio (OR)=2.02, 95% CI=1.00-4.11, P=0.05), no evidence of an independent association was detected in multivariate analysis adjusting for age, sex, and baseline Schaffer grading (adjusted OR=1.24, 0.41-3.75, P=0.7). There was no evidence of an association between LPI and progression of PSC or cortical opacities. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that prophylactic LPI is independently associated with cataract progression in this study