title: The disc as the basis of treatment for glaucoma.
abstract: The goal of the treatment of patients with glaucoma is to prevent disability or, if disability already exists, to repair the disability or at the least to prevent further disability from developing. To achieve these goals requires knowing what will happen if there is no treatment and what will happen if there is treatment. That is, one must know the possible benefits from the therapy in comparison to the damage caused by the therapy. As we will demonstrate, the classic risk factors do not provide accurate estimates of the development of disability and do not answer these two questions. The most helpful clues are provided by what the patient says, by whether the disc is damaged and by whether the disc is deteriorating. The severity of disease is best estimated by the nature of the optic disc and how it changes. This report is primarily focused on increasing the skill of the physician in being able to estimate the nature of the optic disc and how that changes. This does not, however, lessen the tremendous importance of careful history-taking and of gonioscopy. In this report, however, we focus on the evaluation of the disc. Currently disc evaluation is often not adequate because of poor examination techniques, reliance on cup/disc ratios, and reliance on the results of image analyzers. We will present here the Disc Damage Likelihood Scale, which is a user-friendly method which correlates accurately with visual field changes.
authors: Wills Eye Institute, 840 Walnut Street, Suite 1110, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA.
authors: Camila
authors: C
authors: Zangalli
authors: Shelly R
authors: SR
authors: Gupta
authors: George L
authors: GL
authors: Spaeth
keywords: Care; Cup/disc ratio; DDLS; Glaucoma; Optic disc
references: Arch Ophthalmol. 1991 Aug;109(8):1090-5
references: 1867550
references: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003 Sep;44(9):3885-91
references: 12939305
references: Klin Monbl Augenheilkd Augenarztl Fortbild. 1958;133(5):662-70
references: 13621563
references: Am J Ophthalmol. 2000 Oct;130(4):429-40
references: 11024415
references: Ophthalmology. 2002 Jun;109(6):1059-65
references: 12045044
references: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1988 Aug;29(8):1294-8
references: 3417413
references: Arch Ophthalmol. 2002 Jun;120(6):714-20; discussion 829-30
references: 12049575
references: Am J Ophthalmol. 2002 Jun;133(6):758-63
references: 12036666
references: Ophthalmology. 1998 Nov;105(11):2099-104
references: 9818612
references: Arch Ophthalmol. 1974 Mar;91(3):200-2
references: 4814967
references: Arch Ophthalmol. 1994 May;112(5):644-9
references: 8185522
references: JAMA. 2006 Feb 15;295(7):801-8
references: 16478903
references: Ophthalmology. 2003 May;110(5):900-7
references: 12750087