Validity of a personal and family history of cataract and cataract surgery in genetic studies.

PURPOSE:

To determine the accuracy of a history of cataract and cataract surgery (self-report and for a sibling), and to determine which demographic, cognitive, and medical factors are predictive of an accurate history.

METHODS:

All participants in the Salisbury Eye Evaluation (SEE) project and their locally resident siblings were questioned about a personal and family history of cataract or cataract surgery. Lens grading at the slit lamp, using standardized photographs and a grading system, was performed for both SEE participants (probands) and their siblings. Cognitive testing and a history of systemic comorbidities were also obtained for all probands.

RESULTS:

Sensitivity of a history of cataract provided on behalf of a sibling was 32%, specificity 98%. The performance was better for a history of cataract surgery: sensitivity 90%, specificity 89%. For self-report of cataract, sensitivity was also low at 55%, with specificity at 77%. Self-report of cataract surgery gave a much better performance: sensitivity 94%, specificity 100%. Different cutoffs in the definition of cataract had little impact. Factors predicting a correct history of cataract included high school or greater education in the proband (odds ratio [OR] = 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]1.02-1.25) and younger sibling (but not proband) age (OR = 0.94 for each year of age, 95% CI 0.90-0.99). Gender, race and Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) result were not predictive.

CONCLUSIONS:

Whereas accurate self and family histories for cataract surgery may be obtainable, it is difficult to ascertain cataract status accurately from history alone.

Nuclear cataract shows significant familial aggregation in an older population after adjustment for possible shared environmental factors.

PURPOSE: To quantify the association between siblings in age-related nuclear cataract, after adjusting for known environmental and personal risk factors. METHODS: All participants (probands) in the Salisbury Eye Evaluation (SEE) project and their locally resident siblings underwent digital slit lamp photography and were administered a questionnaire to assess risk factors for cataract including: age, gender, lifetime sun exposure, smoking and diabetes history, and use of alcohol and medications such as estrogens and steroids. In addition, blood pressure, body mass index, and serum antioxidants were measured in all participants. Lens photographs were graded by trained observers masked to the subjects' identity, using the Wilmer Cataract Grading System. The odds ratio for siblings for affectedness with nuclear cataract and the sibling correlation of nuclear cataract grade, after adjusting for covariates, were estimated with generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Among 307 probands (mean age, 77.6 +/- 4.5 years) and 434 full siblings (mean age, 72.4 +/- 7.4 years), the average sibship size was 2.7 per family. After adjustment for covariates, the probability of development of nuclear cataract was significantly increased (odds ratio [OR] = 2.07, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30-3.30) among individuals with a sibling with nuclear cataract (nuclear grade > or = 3.0). The final fitted model indicated a magnitude of heritability for nuclear cataract of 35.6% (95% CI: 21.0%-50.3%) after adjustment for the covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Findings in this study are consistent with a genetic effect for age-related nuclear cataract, a common and clinically significant form of lens opacity.

Cataract surgery and subtype in a defined, older population: the SEECAT Project

AIM:

To describe the distribution of cataract subtypes present before surgery among a defined population of older, bilaterally pseudophakic individuals.

METHODS:

This was a cohort study of bilaterally pseudophakic individuals participating in the Salisbury Eye Evaluation (SEE), and their locally resident siblings. Subjects underwent slit lamp and retroillumination photography and grading using the Wilmer Cataract Grading System. For all individuals determined to be bilaterally pseudophakic, an attempt was made to determine for each eye the type(s) of cataract present before surgery, based on previous SEE photographs (for SEE participants) and/or medical records obtained from the operating ophthalmologist (for both SEE participants and their siblings).

RESULTS:

The mean age of 223 participants providing data in this study was 78.7 (SD 5.2) years, 19.3% of subjects were black and 60.1% female. The most common surgically removed cataract subtype in this population was pure nuclear (43.5%), followed by nuclear combined with posterior subcapsular cataract (PSC) (20.6%), and nuclear combined with cortical (13.9%); less common types were pure cortical (4.9%), pure PSC (4.5%), and PSC combined with cortical (2.7%). Factors such as sex and source of lens data (study photograph versus clinical record) did not significantly affect the distribution of lens opacity types, while PSC was significantly (p = 0.01) more common among younger people and nuclear cataract was significantly (p = 0.001) more common among white compared to black people.

CONCLUSION:

Epidemiological studies have suggested that the different subtypes of cataract are associated with different risk factors. As studies begin to identify new prevention strategies for cataract, it would appear likely that different strategies will be efficacious against different types of cataract. In this setting, it will be helpful to know which cataract types are most frequently associated with surgery. Among this older, majority white population, nuclear cataract showed a clear predominance among individuals having undergone surgery in both eyes. This may be contrasted with both clinic and population based studies of younger people, which have generally found PSC cataract to predominate.

Cortical, but not posterior subcapsular, cataract shows significant familial aggregation in an older population after adjustment for possible shared environmental factors.

PURPOSE:

To quantify the risk for age-related cortical cataract and posterior subcapsular cataract (PSC) associated with having an affected sibling after adjusting for known environmental and personal risk factors.

DESIGN:

Sibling cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS:

Participants in the ongoing Salisbury Eye Evaluation (SEE) study (n = 321; mean age, 78.1+/-4.2 years) and their locally resident siblings (n = 453; mean age, 72.6+/-7.4 years) were recruited at the time of Rounds 3 and 4 of the SEE study. INTERVENTION/TESTING METHODS: Retroillumination photographs of the lens were graded for the presence of cortical cataract and PSC with the Wilmer grading system. The residual correlation between siblings' cataract grades was estimated after adjustment for a number of factors (age; gender; race; lifetime exposure to ultraviolet-B light; cigarette, alcohol, estrogen, and steroid use; serum antioxidants; history of diabetes; blood pressure; and body mass index) suspected to be associated with the presence of cataract.

RESULTS:

The average sibship size was 2.7 per family. Multivariate analysis revealed the magnitude of heritability (h(2)) for cortical cataract to be 24% (95% CI, 6%-42%), whereas that for PSC was not statistically significant (h(2) 4%; 95% CI, 0%-11%) after adjustment for the covariates. The model revealed that increasing age, female gender, a history of diabetes, and black race increased the odds of cortical cataract, whereas higher levels of provitamin A were protective. A history of diabetes and steroid use increased the odds for PSC.

CONCLUSIONS:

This study is consistent with a significant genetic effect for age-related cortical cataract but not PSC.

Heritability of refractive error and familial aggregation of myopia in an elderly American population.

PURPOSE: To determine the heritability of refractive error and the familial aggregation of myopia in an older population. METHODS: Seven hundred fifty-nine siblings (mean age, 73.4 years) in 241 families were recruited from the Salisbury Eye Evaluation (SEE) Study in eastern Maryland. Refractive error was determined by noncycloplegic subjective refraction (if presenting distance visual acuity was < or =20/40) or lensometry (if best corrected visual acuity was >20/40 with spectacles). Participants were considered plano (refractive error of zero) if uncorrected visual acuity was >20/40. Preoperative refraction from medical records was used for pseudophakic subjects. Heritability of refractive error was calculated with multivariate linear regression and was estimated as twice the residual between-sibling correlation after adjusting for age, gender, and race. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) of myopia, given a myopic sibling relative to having a nonmyopic sibling. RESULTS: The estimated heritability of refractive error was 61% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 34%-88%) in this population. The age-, race-, and sex-adjusted ORs of myopia were 2.65 (95% CI: 1.67-4.19), 2.25 (95% CI: 1.31-3.87), 3.00 (95% CI: 1.56-5.79), and 2.98 (95% CI: 1.51-5.87) for myopia thresholds of -0.50, -1.00, -1.50, and -2.00 D, respectively. Neither race nor gender was significantly associated with an increased risk of myopia. CONCLUSIONS: Refractive error and myopia are highly heritable in this elderly population.

Determinants and heritability of intraocular pressure and cup-to-disc ratio in a defined older population.

PURPOSE:

To investigate the heritability of intraocular pressure (IOP) and cup-to-disc ratio (CDR) in an older well-defined population.

DESIGN:

Family-based cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS:

Through the population-based Salisbury Eye Evaluation study, we recruited 726 siblings (mean age, 74.7 years) in 284 sibships.

METHODS:

Intraocular pressure and CDR were measured bilaterally for all participants. The presence or absence of glaucoma was determined by a glaucoma specialist for all probands on the basis of visual field, optic nerve appearance, and history. The heritability of IOP was calculated as twice the residual between-sibling correlation of IOP using linear regression and generalized estimating equations after adjusting for age, gender, mean arterial pressure, race, self-reported diabetes status, and history of systemic steroid use. The heritability of CDR was calculated using the same model and adjustments as above, while also adjusting for IOP.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

Heritability and determinants of IOP and CDR, and impact of siblings' glaucoma status on IOP and CDR.

RESULTS:

We estimated the heritability to be 0.29 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.12-0.46) for IOP and 0.56 (95% CI, 0.35-0.76) for CDR in this population. Mean IOP in siblings of glaucomatous probands was statistically significantly higher than in siblings of normal probands (mean difference, 1.02 mmHg; P = 0.017). The mean CDR in siblings of glaucomatous probands was 0.07 (or 19%) larger than in siblings of glaucoma suspect referrals (P = 0.045) and siblings of normal probands (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS:

In this elderly population, we found CDR to be highly heritable and IOP to be moderately heritable. On average, siblings of glaucoma patients had higher IOPs and larger CDRs than siblings of nonglaucomatous probands.

Physical rehabilitation interventions for adult patients during critical illness: an overview of systematic reviews

Background Physical rehabilitation interventions aim to ameliorate the effects of critical illness-associated muscle dysfunction in survivors. We conducted an overview of systematic reviews (SR) evaluating the effect of these interventions across the continuum of recovery.

Methods Six electronic databases (Cochrane Library, CENTRAL, DARE, Medline, Embase, and Cinahl) were searched. Two review authors independently screened articles for eligibility and conducted data extraction and quality appraisal. Reporting quality was assessed and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach applied to summarise overall quality of evidence.

Results Five eligible SR were included in this overview, of which three included meta-analyses. Reporting quality of the reviews was judged as medium to high. Two reviews reported moderate-to-high quality evidence of the beneficial effects of physical therapy commencing during intensive care unit (ICU) admission in improving critical illness polyneuropathy/myopathy, quality of life, mortality and healthcare utilisation. These interventions included early mobilisation, cycle ergometry and electrical muscle stimulation. Two reviews reported very low to low quality evidence of the beneficial effects of electrical muscle stimulation delivered in the ICU for improving muscle strength, muscle structure and critical illness polyneuropathy/myopathy. One review reported that due to a lack of good quality randomised controlled trials and inconsistency in measuring outcomes, there was insufficient evidence to support beneficial effects from physical rehabilitation delivered post-ICU discharge.

Conclusions Patients derive short-term benefits from physical rehabilitation delivered during ICU admission. Further robust trials of electrical muscle stimulation in the ICU and rehabilitation delivered following ICU discharge are needed to determine the long-term impact on patient care. This overview provides recommendations for design of future interventional trials and SR.