Purpose: To evaluate clinical aspects of patients with the diagnosis of plateau iris (PI) or pseudoplateau iris (PPI) made by ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM) in order to determine if there are clinical factors that can help differentiate between these two entities.
Method: A retrospective cohort of consecutive UBM patients with the diagnosis of PI or PPI. The diagnosis of PI was based on an anteriorly positioned ciliary body that abutted the peripheral iris, a narrow (<10 degrees) or closed angle for at least 180 degrees, and the anterior portion of the iris positioned anterior to scleral spur. The diagnosis of PPI was similar to plateau except that large or a cluster of small cysts had to be present in the iridociliary sulcus.
Results: There were a total of 76 patients (28% male), 21 with PPI and 55 with PI. Patients with PPI were more likely to be male (p=0.005 ), slightly younger (51.5 ± 10.7 vs. 57.9 ± 10.2 p= 0.0190), have a 'bumpy' peripheral iris appearance (p=0.003), have greater trabecular meshwork pigmentation (2.0 + 0.7 vs. 1.3 + 0.6 p=0.004), and have less clock hours of gonioscopic angle closure vs. plateau iris patients (5.1 + 4.3 vs. 9.2 + 4.2 p=0.0009). Spherical equivalent was not significantly different between groups (0.50D±1.69 PPI vs. 1.33D±2.42 PI; p=0.187).
Conclusions: In patients being referred to a UBM clinic for evaluation of angle closure mechanism, younger males with a bumpy peripheral iris have a higher likelihood of having a diagnosis of pseudoplateau iris. However, clinical factors do not appear to discriminate well between PPI and PI. UBM is extremely helpful in confirming underlying mechanism and guiding therapy.
- Plateau iris syndrome
- Pseudoplateau iris syndrome
- Ultrasound Biomicroscopy
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.