0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Research Letters |

Early Diabetes Mellitus or Hypertension Is Not Significantly Associated With Severity of Vision Loss in Nonarteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy FREE

John D. Odette, MD; Dale O. Okorodudu, MD; Lenworth N. Johnson, MD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Neuro-Ophthalmology Unit, Mason Eye Institute, University of Missouri–Columbia.


Arch Ophthalmol. 2011;129(8):1106-1107. doi:10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.209.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Glaucoma is a progressive optic neuropathy with features similar to nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), the most common optic neuropathy causing acute vision loss. Glaucoma has an annual incidence rate of 240 per capita, while NAION has an annual incidence of 2.3 per capita among individuals older than 50 years.1,2 Early diabetes mellitus (DM)—defined as an absence of clinically visible diabetic retinopathy—may be associated with upregulation and downregulation of intraocular interferon, interleukins, and other cytokines promoting neuroprotection.3 The initial Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study report documented a protective effect of early DM in glaucoma development, but reanalysis showed no effect.4,5 Studies have shown DM to be a risk factor for NAION, but it is possible that early DM could have neuroprotective effects in NAION. Hayreh and Zimmerman6 had documented less severe visual field loss for diabetic patients with NAION. However, 11% of their participants had juvenile diabetes, 36% had diabetic retinopathy, and the investigators had used manual kinetic perimetry. To discern the role of early DM in NAION, we have studied patients aged 50 years or older without diabetic retinopathy using automated static perimetry.

We reviewed the records of all patients with NAION evaluated by the neuro-ophthalmology service between October 1990 and August 2009, after obtaining institutional review board approval. Criteria for NAION were similar to those used in past studies.2 Patients were excluded if they had significant cataract, presumed toxic causes of NAION such as amiodarone hydrochloride or erectile dysfunction drug use, perioperative NAION, diabetic retinopathy, temporal arteritis, or other disorders that could cause the vision loss. A standardized comprehensive medical history and comprehensive neuro-ophthalmologic examination were obtained for all patients, including best-corrected visual acuity, Humphrey automated perimetry program 24-2 or 30-2 Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm fast results, and dilated ophthalmoscopy.

Patients were classified as having DM with or without hypertension or not having DM with or without hypertension. Diabetes was identified if the patient had been diagnosed by the primary care physician as having DM or if the patient had been prescribed oral hypoglycemic medications or insulin prior to NAION. Patients with hypertension had been prescribed antihypertensive medications. Usable visual fields had less than 33% fixation loss, false-negative errors, and false-positive errors. Statistical analyses were performed with SAS version 9 statistical software (SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, North Carolina). We compared categorical variables such as sex with χ2 test, ordinal variables such as age with Wilcoxon rank sum test, and logMAR visual acuity and mean deviation on visual field with 2-sample t test and analyses of variance and covariance.

A total of 206 patients (53 with DM [43 having hypertension] and 153 without DM [73 having hypertension]) who were aged 50 years or older (mean age, 65.1 years; male, 122 [59%]) qualified for the study. There were 176 usable visual fields (45 with DM and 131 without DM). There was no significant difference in logMAR visual acuity (P = .77) for DM (mean [SD], 0.81 [0.71]) and no DM (mean [SD], 0.84 [0.79]) or when accounting for the presence or absence of hypertension (P = .10) (Table). There was no significant difference in visual field mean deviation (P = .52) for DM (mean [SD], −18.5 [9.8] dB) and no DM (mean [SD], −17.5 [9.1] dB) or when accounting for the presence or absence of hypertension (P = .34). There was no trend for better (or worse) visual field for DM compared with no DM (Cochran-Armitage test, P = .79).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable. LogMAR Visual Acuity and Mean Deviation of Standard Automated Perimetry

Among patients with NAION, those with early DM had a similar degree of visual acuity and visual field loss compared with those without DM. There was no trend for patients with early DM to have a better or worse visual field after NAION compared with patients without DM. Early DM is neither protective nor harmful in NAION with respect to the severity of vision loss.

Correspondence: Dr Johnson, Neuro-Ophthalmology Unit, Mason Eye Institute, University of Missouri–Columbia, 1 Hospital Dr, Columbia, MO 65212 (johnsonln@health.missouri.edu).

Financial Disclosure: None reported.

Funding/Support: This work was supported in part by an unrestricted grant from Research to Prevent Blindness, Inc, New York, New York, to the Department of Ophthalmology, University of Missouri–Columbia.

Bengtsson BO. Incidence of manifest glaucoma.  Br J Ophthalmol. 1989;73(7):483-487
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Johnson LN, Guy ME, Krohel GB, Madsen RW. Levodopa may improve vision loss in recent-onset, nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy.  Ophthalmology. 2000;107(3):521-526
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Quigley HA. Can diabetes be good for glaucoma? why can't we believe our own eyes (or data)?  Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(2):227-229
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD,  et al.  The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma.  Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(6):714-720
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Kass MA.Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study Group.  Is a history of diabetes mellitus protective against developing primary open-angle glaucoma?  Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(2):280-281
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hayreh SS, Zimmerman MB. Nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy: clinical characteristics in diabetic patients vs nondiabetic patients.  Ophthalmology. 2008;115(10):1818-1825
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Figures

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable. LogMAR Visual Acuity and Mean Deviation of Standard Automated Perimetry

References

Bengtsson BO. Incidence of manifest glaucoma.  Br J Ophthalmol. 1989;73(7):483-487
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Johnson LN, Guy ME, Krohel GB, Madsen RW. Levodopa may improve vision loss in recent-onset, nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy.  Ophthalmology. 2000;107(3):521-526
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Quigley HA. Can diabetes be good for glaucoma? why can't we believe our own eyes (or data)?  Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(2):227-229
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD,  et al.  The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma.  Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(6):714-720
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Kass MA.Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study Group.  Is a history of diabetes mellitus protective against developing primary open-angle glaucoma?  Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(2):280-281
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hayreh SS, Zimmerman MB. Nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy: clinical characteristics in diabetic patients vs nondiabetic patients.  Ophthalmology. 2008;115(10):1818-1825
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 1

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
JAMAevidence.com

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature
Clinical Scenario

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature
Example 1: Diabetes and Target Blood Pressure