Comparative study of the efficacy of lens extraction and laser peripheral iridotomy in primary anterior chamber angle closure

PURPOSE. To compare the anatomical and functional effectiveness of lensectomy (LE) and laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI) in patients with primary anterior chamber angle closure.

METHODS. This prospective study included 120 patients aged 41 to 80 years (60 eyes — primary angle closure (PAC), 30 — primary angle closure suspects (PACs), 30 eyes — without ophthalmic pathology). 30 PAC eyes were treated using LE with intraocular lens implantation, and 30 eyes with LPI. All subjects underwent swept source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT). The following parameters were analyzed: spherical equivalent (SE), uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity, intraocular pressure (IOP), Shaffer grade of angle opening, lens opacity, goniosyne chiae, choroidal thickness in the macular region, axial length (AL) of the eye, anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens vault (LV), iris curvature (ICurv), iris thickness at 750 µm from scleral spur (IT750), angle opening distance (AOD500, AOD750), iridotrabecular space area (TISA500, TISA750). Along with standard descriptive statistics methods, machine learning methods were used, including Data Driven Soft Independent Modelling of Class Analogies (DD-SIMCA).

RESULTS. Every third eye with PAC had reached control group values after LE (DD-SIMCA specificity 0.67), which was not the case after LPI (DD-SIMCA specificity 1.0) with the probability of getting into the control group estimated as 0.01. After LE, all parameters of the anterior chamber angle did not significantly differ from the norm (p>0.05 for all), while ACD, ICurv even exceeded the norm (p=0.000). After LPI, there was a deepening of the ACD (from 2.34±0.28 mm to 2.36±0.280 mm, p=0.000) and a decrease in LV (from 0.864±0.120 µm to 0.843±0.110 µm, p=0.000), however, the result comparable to control was achieved only in ICurv (p=1.000). After LE in PAC, all parameters, including uncorrected visual acuity, SE, ACD, LV, iris profile, Shaffer grade of angle opening, and AOD500, AOD750, TISA500, TISA750 parameters in the superior and inferior sectors had advantages over those in PACs without treatment (p<0.05). After LPI, an improvement in a number of pa rameters was also achieved compared to LPI: ICurv, Shaffer grade of angle opening, AOD500, AOD750, TISA500, TISA750 in the superior sectors and AOD500 in the inferior sector (p><0.05).

CONCLUSION. The effectiveness of LE in PAC is higher than LPI due to the better postoperative anterior chamber topography and lower IOP. Both treatments, especially LE, improve these parameters compared to PACs. Lens extraction is the treatment of choice at the early stages of primary angle closure.

1. Foster PJ, Oen FT, Machin D, et al. The prevalence of glaucoma in Chinese residents of Singapore: a cross-sectional population survey of the Tanjong Pagar district. Arch Ophthalmol 2000; 118(8):1105-1111. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.118.8.1105

2. Friedman DS, Foster PJ, Aung T, He M. Angle closure and angle- closure glaucoma: what we are doing now and what we will be doing in the future. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2012; 40(4):381-387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9071.2012.02774.x

3. Zhekov I, Pardhan S, Bourne RR. Optical coherence tomography-measured changes over time in anterior chamber angle and diurnal intraocular pressure after laser iridotomy: IMPACT study. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2018; 46(8):895-902. https://doi.org/10.1111/ceo.13303

4. Park HS, Kim JM, Shim SH, et al. Diurnal intraocular pressure changes in eyes affected with acute primary angle closure and fellow eyes after laser peripheral iridotomy. Jpn J Ophthalmol 2015; 59(5):318-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10384-015-0399-8

5. Guo ZZ, Chang K, Wei X. Intraocular pressure fluctuation and the risk of glaucomatous damage deterioration: a meta-analysis. Int J Ophthalmol 2019; 12(1):123-128. https://doi.org/10.18240/ijo.2019.01.19

6. Sihota R, Rishi K, Srinivasan G, Gupta V, Dada T, Singh K. Functional evaluation of an iridotomy in primary angle closure eyes. Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologi 2016; 254(6):1141-1149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-016-3298-x

7. Lee KS, Sung KR, Kang SY, Cho JW, Kim DY, Kook MS. Residual anterior chamber angle closure in narrow-angle eyes following laser peripheral iridotomy: anterior segment optical coherence tomography quantitative study. Jpn J Ophthalmol 2011; 55(3):213-219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10384-011-0009-3

8. Nonaka A, Kondo T, Kikuchi M, Yamashiro K, Fujihara M, Iwawaki T, Yamamoto K, Kurimoto Y. Cataract surgery for residual angle closure after peripheral laser iridotomy. Ophthalmology 2005; 112(6): 974-979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.12.042

9. Jiang Y, Chang DS, Zhu H, et al. Longitudinal changes of angle configuration in primary angle-closure suspects: the Zhongshan Angle-Closure Prevention Trial. Ophthalmology 2014; 121(9):1699-1705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.03.039

10. Bo J, Changulani T, Cheng ML, Tatham AJ. Outcome Following Laser Peripheral Iridotomy and Predictors of Future Lens Extraction. J Glaucoma 2018; 27(3):275-280. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0000000000000863

11. Belikova E.I., Sharova G.A. A Personalized Approach to the Treatment of Patients with Latent Stage Angle-Closure Glaucoma. Ophthalmology in Russia 2020; 17(3S):566-571. https://doi.org/10.18008/1816-5095-2020-3S-566-571

12. Song MK, Sung KR, Shin JW, Jo YH, Won HJ. Glaucomatous Progression After Lens Extraction in Primary Angle Closure Disease Spectrum. J Glaucoma 2020; 29(8):711-717. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0000000000001537

13. Siguan-Bell CS, Chansangpetch S, Perez CI, et al. Anterior Segment Parameters of Filipino-Americans Compared to Chinese-Americans and Caucasian Americans Using Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2019; 8(2):11. https://doi.org/10.1167/tvst.8.2.11

14. Azuara-Blanco A., Burr J., Ramsay C., et al. Effectiveness of early lens extraction for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma (EAGLE): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2016; 388(10052): 1389-1397. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140 6736(16)30956-4

15. He M, Jiang Y, Huang S, Chang DS, Munoz B, Aung T, Foster PJ, Friedman DS. Laser peripheral iridotomy for the prevention of angle closure: a single-centre, Randomized controlled trial. Lancet 2019; 393(10181):1609-1618. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32607-2

16. Foster PJ, Buhrmann R, Quigley HA, Johnson GJ. The definition and classification of glaucoma in prevalence surveys. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86(2):238-242. https://doi.org10.1136/bjo.86.2.238

17. Chylack LT Jr, Wolfe JK, Singer DM, et al. The Lens Opacities Classification System III. The Longitudinal Study of Cataract Study Group. Arch Ophthalmol 1993; 111(6):831-836. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.1993.01090060119035

18. Kurysheva N.I., Sharova G.A. The Role of Optical Coherence Tomography in the Diagnosis of Angle Closed Diseases of the Anterior Chamber. Part 1: Visualization of the Anterior Segment of the Eye. Ophthalmology in Russia 2021; 18(2):208-215. https://doi.org/10.18008/1816-5095-2021-2-208-215

19. Kurysheva N.I., Boyarinceva M.A., Fomin A.V. Choroidal thickness in primary angle-closure glaucoma: the results of Measurement by Means of Optical Coherence Tomography. Ophthalmology in Russia 2013; 10(4):26-31. https://doi.org/10.18008/1816-5095-2013-4-26-31

20. Rodionova O. Ye., Kurysheva N.I., Sharova G.A., Pomerantsev A.L. Expanding the DD-SIMCA concept: A case study of precision medicine. Analytica Chimica Acta 2023; 1250, 340958, ISSN 0003-2670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2023.340958

21. Kurysheva N.I., Pomerantsev A.L., Rodionova O.Y., Sharova G.A. Machine Learning Methods in the Comparative Evaluation of Various Approaches to the Surgical Treatment of Primary Angle Closure. Ophthalmology in Russia 2022; 19(3):549-556. https://doi.org/10.18008/1816-5095-2022-3-549-556

22. Pomerantsev A.L. Acceptance areas for multivariate classification derived by projection methods. J Chemometrics 2008; 22:601-609. https://doi.org/10.1002/cem.1147

23. Pomerantsev A.L., Rodionova O.Ye. Concept and role of extreme objects in PCA/SIMCA. J Chemometrics 2014; 28:429-438. https://doi.org/10.1002/cem.2506

24. Pomerantsev A.L., Rodionova O.Ye. On the type II error in SIMCA method. J Chemometrics 2014; 28:518-522. https://doi.org/10.1002/cem.2610

25. Dada T, Rathi A, Angmo D, et al. Clinical outcomes of clear lens extraction in eyes with primary angle closure. J Cataract Refract Surg 2015; 41(7):1470-1477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.10.029

26. Zhang Y, Thomas R, Zhang Q, Li SZ, Wang NL. Progression of Primary Angle Closure Suspect to Primary Angle Closure and Associated Risk Factors: The Handan Eye Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2021; 62(7):2. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.62.7.2

27. Moghimi S, Chen R, Johari M, Bijani F, Mohammadi M, Khodabandeh A, He M, Lin SC. Changes in Anterior Segment Morphology After Laser Peripheral Iridotomy in Acute Primary Angle Closure. Am J Ophthalmol 2016; 166:133-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2016.03.032

28. Ang BC, Nongpiur ME, Aung T, Mizoguchi T, Ozaki M. Changes in Japanese eyes after laser peripheral iridotomy: an anterior segment optical coherence tomography study. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2016; 44(3): 159-165. https://doi.org/10.1111/ceo.12673

29. Lee RY, Kasuga T, Cui QN, et al. Association between baseline iris thickness and prophylactic laser peripheral iridotomy outcomes in primary angle-closure suspects. Ophthalmology 2014; 121(6):1194-1202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.12.027

30. Wang N, Ouyang J, Zhou W, Lai M, Ye T, Zeng M, Chen J. [Multiple patterns of angle closure mechanisms in primary angle closure glaucoma in Chinese]. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi 2000; 36(1):46-6. Chinese.

31. Mak H, Xu G, Leung CK. Imaging the iris with swept-source optical coherence tomography: relationship between iris volume and primary angle closure. Ophthalmology 2013; 120(12):2517-2524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.05.009

32. Yan C, Han Y, Yu Y, et al. Effects of lens extraction versus laser peripheral iridotomy on anterior segment morphology in primary angle closure suspect. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2019; 257(7):1473-1480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-019-04353-8

33. Kurysheva N.I., Sharova G.A., Belikova E.I. Studying the role of the choroid and lens in the development of primary anterior chamber angle closure. National Journal glaucoma 2022; 21(1):3-13. https://doi.org/10.53432/2078-4104-2022-21-1-3-13

34. Kurysheva NI, Sharova GA. Comparative study of retinal microcirculation in primary angle closure disease and early primary open-angle glaucoma. Vestnik Oftalmologii 2022; 138(1):44-51. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/oftalma20221380114451.

35. Ghadamzadeh M, Karimi F, Ghasemi Moghaddam S, Daneshvar R. Anterior Chamber Angle Changes in Primary Angle-closure Glaucoma Following Phacoemulsification Versus Phacotrabeculectomy: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial. J Glaucoma 2022; 31(3):147-155. https://10.1097/IJG.0000000000001977

36. Yun-Hsuan Lin, Cheng-Hsiu Wu, Shih-Ming Huang, Chen Hsieh, Henry Shen-Lih Chen, Wan-Chen Ku, Ming-Hui Sun, Wei-Wen Su. Early versus Delayed Phacoemulsification and Intraocular Lens Implantation for Acute Primary Angle-Closure. J Ophthalmol 2020; 2020:8319570. https://10.1155/2020/8319570

37. Aung T, Ang LP, Chan SP, Chew PT. Acute primary angle-closure: long-term intraocular pressure outcome in Asian eyes. Am J Ophthalmol 2001; 131(1):7-12. https://10.1016/s0002-9394(00)00621-8

38. Zuo C, Long B, Guo X, Chen L, Liu X. Effect of Phacoemulsification on Anterior Chamber Angle in Eyes with Medically Uncontrolled Filtered Primary Angle-Closure Glaucoma. J Ophthalmol 2020; 2020:8720450. https://10.1155/2020/8720450

39. Kurysheva N.I., Sharova G.A. Efficacy of laser iridotomy in primary angle closure suspects and primary angle closure glaucoma. The EYE GLAZ 2022; 24(1):20-33. https://doi.org/10.33791/2222-4408-2022-1-20-33