No abstract

In 2001, for the first time in its life, the AISG is holding its Annual Meeting far away from its traditional venue, i.e. Rapallo.The explanation for this decision on the part of its Directive Council, approved, moreover, enthusiastically, by the great majority of its members, lies, in my opinion, in two good reasons: 1 the concomitant IGS with the weight of its programme and the number of participants, as well as the outstanding names present; 2 the attractive beauty of this famous city of Prague, so full of history and charming spots.Our idea has been very much appreciated by our Greek colleagues, who have decided to join us in this initiative, which, on the other hand, has been supported right from the beginning as well by the organizers of IGS, Prof Melamed and Prof Schumann. To both of them go our sincere thanks for their welcome and collaboration.Let us think of it this way, however, that a third good reason for joining our forces may lie in the desire not only to exchange ideas and knowledge, but to meet friends who, for many reasons of life, we see all too rarely and with whom it is so nice to spend some time in a pleasant atmosphere speaking of many topics not necessarily only of ophthalmology.Also for this reason, let us succeed in respecting the times of the programme so as to have more time for enjoying ourselves. 7Prague opening remarks Partly as a result of my participation as moderator in the 1999 American Academy of Ophthalmology Glaucoma Subspecialty Day Symposium on Normal Tension Glaucoma, I have been requested to present an overview on this topic. Having made liberal use of materials provided by each of the speakers in the symposium, I wish to thank Drs Brian Lee, David Greenfield and Roger Hitchings and acknowledge their contributions. This presentation will be divided into the following four sections:I. The misnomer of normal tension glaucoma (NTG). II. Potentially contributing factors in the pathogenesis of glaucoma and their relevance to normal tension glaucoma. III. Potentially differentiating characteristics between glaucoma with normal IOP and glaucoma with elevated intraocular pressure (IOP). IV. Lessons learned from the Normal Tension Glaucoma Study. I. The misnomer of normal tension glaucoma (NTG)There is considerable controversy on whether normal tension glaucoma represents a distinct entity or is simply primary openangle glaucoma (POAG) with IOP within the normal range. Because IOP is a continuous variable with no definite dividing line between normal and abnormal, many authorities are questioning whether the term normal tension glaucoma should be abandoned. Normal tension glaucoma is typically defined as a glaucomatous optic neuropathy despite IOP consistently below 21 mmHg. The question must therefore be asked, 'What's so special about 21 mmHg?' Answering that question requires a review of Leydhecker's landmark investigation of 1958 wherein the IOPs of 20 000 eyes were obtained with Schiotz tonometry (Leydhecker et al. 1959). The mean IOP was found to be 15.5 mmHg with a standar...

We report a case of branch retinal artery occlusion (BRAO) that occurred after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A 59-year-old man with no other previous diseases presented visual acuity deterioration in the left eye 24 hours after PCI. Fundus examination revealed ischemia at the temporal branch of the retinal artery associated with inner layer edema. Prompt treatment was performed with ocular digital massage and paracentesis of the anterior chamber. However, at discharge, the patient had a persistent visual loss with a central scotoma that persisted at 35-day follow-up without improvement of the visual acuity. The patient did not suffer from any other systemic complications. Retinal infarction should be considered a potential complication of PCI. Patients and health care providers should be aware of any visual signs. Permanent visual disability can be prevented by immediate diagnosis and prompt intervention.

AimsThe aim of this study was to examine comparatively the effect of the three products: timolol, latanoprost and dorzolamide, on the circadian intraocular pressure (lOP) in patients with chronic simple glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Materials and MethodsIn a cross-over study, 20 patients had their 4 circadian curves traced, these being: one after therapeutic wash-out and one after one month of treatment with each of the 3 therapies. The lOP was measured every 3 hours throughout the 24 hours. Timolol was more efficacious than dorzolamide at noon, while dorzolamide was more efficacious than timolol at 3 o'clock in the morning. Latanoprost in monotherapy compared ConclusionsLatanoprost seemed to lower lOP uniformly over the 24 hours. Timolol seemed less efficacious in the nocturnal hours, while dorzolamide seemed to control the lOP during the night, though it was less powerful than latanoprost or timolol during the day. and ocular hypertensive (OHT) patients no longer responsive to treatment with a ~-blocker. Materials and MethodsFor this open study, 160 patients affected by POAG or OHT uncontrolled by therapy with a ~-blocker were randomly assigned to receive latanoprost 0.005% once a day in monotherapy or to receive timolol with dorzolamide 2% in association b.i.d. for 3 months.The patients were ophthalmologically checked including tonometric curve, the measurement of systemic and ocular symptomatology, examination of the fundus oculari. ResultsIt would appear from an interim analysis of the results that the use of latanoprost therapy in place of the ~-blocker has brought a reduction in diurnal lOP equivalent to that obtained with the association timolol +dorzolamide after 3 months of treatment. ConclusionsThe results of the study would seem to indicate that latanoprost in monotherapy can be used instead of associated timolol and dorzolarnide therapy. -

AimsOur aim was to determine what effect learning had in ocular hypertensive patients in the blue-on-yellow perimetry test. Materials and MethodsFifteen patients affected by ocular hypertension (OHT) aged between 44 and 77 years with normal W/W (MD and CPSD) performed 5 each B/Y and W/W (30-11, Humphrey 750 II) perimetric examinations within a 30-day period in random order. The patients were chosen for their visual acuity of I 0110, absence of ocular disease and W/W perimetry false positives and negatives less than 15%.