Purpose: We investigated relationship of glaucoma with measurements related to autonomic dysfunction, including heart rate variability (HRV) and blood pressure (BP). Methods: Glaucoma was defined using a questionnaire-based algorithm for 86,841 LifeLines Cohort Study participants. Baseline HRV (root mean square of successive differences [RMSSD]) was calculated from resting electrocardiograms; systolic BP (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and pulse pressure (PP) were oscillometric-based measurements. We used a generalized linear mixed model, adjusted for age, age square, sex, body mass index, and familial relationships to assess the relationship of baseline HRV and BP (continuous and quartiles), hypertension, and antihypertensive medication with glaucoma at follow up (median, 3.8 years). Results: The odds ratio (OR) of glaucoma was 0.95 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92–0.99) per unit increase in log-transformed RMSSD (in ms), indicating that autonomous dysfunction (low HRV) is associated with a higher risk of glaucoma. Per 10-mm Hg increase in BP, we found ORs of 1.03 (95% CI, 1.01–1.05; P = 0.015) for SBP, 1.01 (95% CI, 0.97–1.05; P = 0.55) for DBP, 1.03 (95% CI, 1.00–1.06; P = 0.083) for MAP, and 1.04 (95% CI, 1.01–1.07; P = 0.006) for PP. The OR for the lowest versus highest RMSSD quartile was 1.15 (95% CI, 1.05–1.27; P = 0.003). The ORs for the highest versus second quartile were 1.09 (95% CI, 0.99–1.19; P = 0.091) for SBP and 1.13 (95% CI, 1.02–1.24; P = 0.015) for PP. Glaucoma was more common among hypertensives (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.16–1.35; P < 0.001); among those using angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.18–1.55; P < 0.001); and among those using calcium-channel blockers (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.01–1.40; P = 0.039). Conclusions: Low HRV, high SBP, high PP, and hypertension were associated with glaucoma. Longitudinal studies may elucidate if autonomic dysregulation and high BP also predict glaucoma incidence.

Background: Early detection of glaucoma is paramount to maintain patients’ eyesight, however glaucomatous vision loss tends to begin in the periphery with up to 50% of patients unaware they are affected. Because glaucomatous vision loss is permanent, screening appears attractive, but currently is not cost-effective. Therefore we aim to investigate the utility of genetic pre-screening for glaucoma in a population-based setting, called EyeLife. Methods: EyeLife adopts a double blind prospective design with contrasting groups. Selected participants (n = 1600) from the Lifelines cohort are 55 years of age or older, and of either the highest or lowest 20% of the genetic risk distribution for glaucoma. We obtained a highly curated list of genetic variants from the literature to obtain each participants’ genetic risk for glaucoma. Participants will undergo comprehensive ophthalmic screening. The primary outcome is the relative risk of glaucoma given a high genetic risk compared to a low genetic risk. Discussion: If genetic pre-screening is successful, it will increase the yield of a glaucoma screening program by focusing on high-risk individuals. This, in turn, may improve long-term visual health of middle-aged and elderly people. Trial registration: Ethics approval was obtained on January 31, 2019, and the study was retrospectively registered with the Netherlands Trial Register (NL8718) on the 17th of June, 2020.

The purpose of this study was to determine if there is an association between tinnitus and glaucoma. We tested this by first completing a clinic-based cross-sectional questionnaire study in which we sent a series of tinnitus-related questions to glaucoma patients and healthy subjects, and then followed up with a large population-based cross-sectional study in which glaucoma and tinnitus were also assessed by questionnaire. For the clinical study, we received 209 responses from glaucoma patients and 109 responses from healthy subjects (primarily the spouses of the patients). For the population-based study, we evaluated 79,866 participants. Logistic regression models were used to test the relationship between glaucoma and tinnitus; the clinical study analysis was adjusted for age, gender, BMI, hypertension, and diabetes and the population-based study was adjusted for these same variables with the addition of socioeconomic status and subjective hearing loss. For the clinical study, glaucoma patients had an 85% increase in odds for tinnitus (adjusted OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.10 to 3.05). The effect did not depend on pretreatment intraocular pressure, and the associated symptoms were not pulsatile in nature. For the population-based study, glaucoma patients had a 19% increase in odds for tinnitus (adjusted OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.40). Overall, our results suggest that those with glaucoma are more likely to have tinnitus than those without glaucoma. These results provide hypotheses for a mechanism involved in both tinnitus and glaucoma. One possible mechanism could be vascular dysregulation due to impairment of nitric oxide production.

Introduction Glaucoma is the second leading cause of age-related vision loss worldwide; it is an umbrella term that is used to describe a set of complex ocular disorders with a multifactorial aetiology. Both genetic and lifestyle risk factors for glaucoma are well established. Thus far, however, systematic reviews on the heritability of glaucoma have focused on the heritability of primary open-angle glaucoma only. No systematic review has comprehensively reviewed or meta-analysed the heritability of other types of glaucoma, including glaucoma-related endophenotypes. The aim of this study will be to identify relevant scientific literature regarding the heritability of both glaucoma and related endophenotypes and summarise the evidence by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods and analysis This systematic review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols 2015 checklist, which provides a standardised approach for carrying out systematic reviews. To capture as much literature as possible, a comprehensive step-by-step systematic search will be undertaken in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science and ScienceDirect, and studies published until 31 December 2017 will be included. Two reviewers will independently search the articles for eligibility according to predefined selection criteria. A database will be used for screening of eligible articles. The quality of the included studies will be rated independently by two reviewers, using the National Health Institute Quality Assessment tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. A random-effects model will be used for the meta-analysis. This systematic review is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews with a registration number: CRD42017064504. Ethics and dissemination We will use secondary data from peer-reviewed published articles, and hence there is no requirement for ethics approval. The results of this systematic review will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.