Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of nihpaAbout Author manuscriptsSubmit a manuscriptHHS Public Access; Author Manuscript; Accepted for publication in peer reviewed journal;
Prog Retin Eye Res. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2010 May 17.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC2871536


Sohan Singh Hayreh, MD, PhD, DSc, FRCS, FRCOphth


NVG is a severely blinding, intractable disease. The objective of this review is to provide detailed information on its basic and clinical aspects, to enable us to manage it logically. Therefore, its causes, pathogenesis and pathology, methods of early diagnosis and management are discussed. To prevent or reduce the extent of visual loss caused by NVG, the first essential is to have a high index of suspicion of its development. The most common diseases responsible for development of NVG are ischemic CRVO, diabetic retinopathy and ocular ischemic syndrome. In the management strategy, the first priority should be to try to prevent its development by appropriate management of the causative diseases. If NVG develops, early diagnosis is crucial to reduce the extent of visual loss. Management of NVG primarily consists of controlling the high IOP by medical and/or surgical means to minimize the visual loss. Currently we still do not have a satisfactory means of treating NVG and preventing visual loss in the majority, in spite of multiple modes of medical and surgical options advocated over the years and claims made. This review discusses pros and cons for the various advocated treatments.

Keywords: Angle neovascularization, Carbonic anhydrase drugs, Central retinal vein occlusion, Cyclophotocoagulation, Diabetic retinopathy, Intraocular pressure, Iris neovascularization, Neovascular glaucoma, Ocular ischemic syndrome, Trabeculectomy, Glaucoma implants


Neovascular glaucoma (NVG) is a blinding, intractable disease, difficult to manage and often resulting in disastrous visual loss. For a logical understanding and scientific rationale for management of any disease, one first has to know the basic issues involved and the scientifically valid information available on the disease. To prevent or reduce the visual loss caused by NVG, the first essential is to have a high index of suspicion of its development, i.e. to be aware of the various ocular diseases in which it can develop. Once it develops, early diagnosis and rational management are important to minimize the visual loss. Therefore, the objective of this review on NVG is to discuss its causes, pathogenesis and pathology, methods of early diagnosis and finally management.


These can be divided into two categories: (a) the most common causes, and (b) uncommon causes.

2.1. Most common ocular causes of NVG

Diabetic retinopathy, ischemic central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) and ocular ischemic syndrome are by far the most common causes of NVG. There is little controversy about NVG in diabetic retinopathy. However, many of the concepts about NVG in various types of retinal vascular occlusive diseases and ocular ischemic syndrome are controversial. In the Ocular Vascular Clinic of the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics we have systematically investigated the various retinal vascular occlusive diseases as well as ocular ischemic syndrome in detail in longitudinal prospective studies since 1973; these studies have provided new information, contradicting several of the conventional wisdoms on these disorders. Those require detailed discussion in the interest of clarifying the confusion and controversies on these important disorders (see below);

2.1.1. Diabetic retinopathy

Association of NVG with diabetic retinopathy is a well-established clinical entity, and a huge volume of literature has accumulated on this subject. NVG is an advanced manifestation of diabetic retinopathy. NVG may occur without retinal or optic disc neovascularization (NV), however, it is more commonly seen in association with proliferative diabetic retinopathy.

2.1.2. Retinal vascular occlusive diseases

NVG may occur in the setting of ischemic CRVO or more rarely following ischemic hemi-CRVO, simultaneous multiple branch retinal vein occlusion involving large areas of the retina, or when venous occlusions are superimposed upon a background of non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy. There are many unfounded theories regarding NVG and vein occlusions. These have spawned controversy and some confusion on the etiology, natural course and management of NVG in such patients. I have discussed the various misconceptions elsewhere [Hayreh 2005]. I have included here an abbreviated discussion of some of the most common misunderstandings relevant to NVG in retinal vascular occlusive diseases. Retinal vascular occlusive diseases associated with NVG Central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO)

There is a common notion among ophthalmologists that every eye with CRVO is at risk of developing NVG. It is well established now that CRVO is of two distinct types – non-ischemic and ischemia CRVO, with very different clinical findings, complications, course, prognoses and managements (Hayreh 1965,1976,1983,1994, 2003, 2005; Hayreh et al. 1983, 1990a). NVG is a complication only of ischemic CRVO (Hayreh et al. 1983). Eyes with nonischemic CRVO do not develop ocular NV or NVG (Hayreh et al. 1983), unless there is associated diabetic retinopathy or ocular ischemic syndrome - the latter two associated conditions being the sole cause of ocular NV in those eyes, which may wrongly be attributed to nonischemic CRVO. Therefore, the first essential step in the management of CRVO is to determine whether the CRVO is ischemic or non-ischemic. Hayreh et al. (1990a) in their study investigated the various clinical tests that can help to differentiate the two types of CRVO. In almost all the published series, a criterion of “10 disc area of retinal capillary obliteration” has been used to classify CRVO as ischemic. However, studies by Hayreh et al. (1990a) have shown that this is not at all a valid criterion. The presence of isolated, small, focal retinal capillary obliteration is compatible with nonischemic CRVO. The results of a large multicenter CRVO study (The Central Retinal Vein Occlusion Group, 1995) supported their conclusions. This multicenter study clearly showed that eyes with less than “30” disc diameters of retinal capillary nonperfusion and no other risk factor are at low risk for developing iris/angle neovascularization (i.e. ischemic CRVO), “whereas eyes with 75 disc diameters or more are at highest risk”. Thus, “10 disc area of retinal capillary obliteration” on fluorescein angiography is totally unreliable parameter in differentiating ischemic from non-ischemic CRVO. It can result in incorrect diagnosis, prognosis and management.

Hayreh et al. (1990a) in their study, to differentiate ischemic from non-ischemic CRVO during the early acute phase, found a number of much more sensitive and specific diagnostic clinical tests, which make such a differentiation accurately. They divided these tests into two categories:

  1. Functional tests: These consist of visual acuity, visual fields plotted with a Goldmann perimeter, relative afferent pupillary defect and electroretinography. The following table gives their sensitivity and specificity.
    Functional testsSensitivitySpecificity

    Visual acuity:
    ≤ 20/40091%88%

    Peripheral visual fields*:
    No I-2e97%73%
    Defective I-4e92%87%
    Defective V-4e100%100%

    Relative afferent pupillary defect:
    ≥ 0.9 log units80%97%

    b-wave amp.≤60%80%80%
    *Visual field plotted with a Goldmann perimeter.
  2. Morphological tests: These consist of ophthalmoscopy and fluorescein fundus angiography. The study by Hayreh et al. (1990a) showed ophthalmoscopy to be unreliable and most misleading test to differentiate the two types of CRVO at any stage. Fluorescein fundus angiography has multiple limitations (discussed in detail in that study) to provide satisfactory information about the retinal capillary obliteration during the early acute stage, and it provided reliable information at best in 50–60% only.

Thus, their study showed that combined information provided by the six functional tests helps to differentiate ischemic CRVO from nonischemic CRVO most reliably during the early acute stage.

Based upon this and additional criteria, Hayreh et al. (1983) have demonstrated that every eye with ischemic CRVO does not develop ocular NV and/or NVG. The cumulative risk in their study of ocular NV in ischemic CRVO is illustrated in figure 1. It shows that the risk of developing NVG in eyes with ischemic CRVO reaches a maximum of about 45% in aggregate over several years – the maximum risk being during the first 7–8 months only [Hayreh et al. 1983]. They also found that only 20% of all eyes with CRVO are of the ischemic type [Hayreh et al. 1983; Hayreh 1994]. Therefore, the risk of an eye with CRVO developing NVG is not 100% but about 9–10% [Hayreh 2003]. This puts the threat of NVG in CRVO into proper perspective. However, if an ischemic CRVO is identified, one should have a high index of suspicion for development of NVG.

Fig. 1
A graphic representation of cumulative chances (in %) of developing various types of ocular NV in ischemic CRVO in relation to time from onset of the disease (in days). (Reproduced from Hayreh et al. 1983) Hemi-central retinal vein occlusion

Similar to CRVO, hemi-central retinal vein occlusion (HCRVO) may be divided into ischemic and non-ischemic types, based upon clinical findings [Hayreh and Hayreh 1980]. Like the CRVO, NVG is only a complication of the ischemic hemi-CRVO and not in non-ischemic type. In one series, NVG developed in 3% (one of 31) ischemic HCRVO eyes (Hayreh et al. 1983).

In general, the development of NVG in retinal vein occlusion depends upon the severity and extent (area) of retinal ischemia (Hayreh et al. 1983; The Central Vein Occlusion Study 1997). Hemi-CRVO typically involved one hemisphere of the eye. Thus, the risk of developing NVG due to sufficient stimulus in ischemic hemi-CRVO is very low. Retinal vascular occlusive diseases not associated with NVG Branch retinal vein occlusion

There is a prevalent mistaken belief that branch retinal vein occlusion can cause NVG. The principal factors in the development of ocular NV following retinal vein occlusion are the severity and spatial extent (area) of retinal ischemia [Hayreh et al. 1983; The Central Vein Occlusion Study 1997]. In the study by Hayreh et al. (1983) on ocular NV associated with retinal vein occlusion, NONE of the 264 eyes with branch retinal vein occlusion developed NVG. Their studies have indicated that it usually requires at least half or more of the retina to be involved by ischemia to provide adequate neovascular stimulus. The vast majority of major branch retinal vein occlusions involve smaller segments of the retinal vasculature, typically a quarter or less of the retinal surface area. Concerns of development of NVG in branch retinal vein occlusion may stem from equating ischemic CRVO with ischemic changes seen following branch retinal vein occlusion, which represent different clinical entities and scales of stimuli. Thus, there is little risk of NVG following typical or isolated branch retinal vein occlusion. Central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO)

Some authors have proposed that CRAO, similar to ischemic CRVO, may be followed by ocular NV and NVG. A review of all the publications associating NVG with CRAO from 1874 to 1982 revealed a number of problems with this contention (see details in Hayreh and Podhajsky 1982). Studies by Hayreh et al. [Hayreh and Podhajsky 1982; Hayreh and Zimmerman 2007], which evaluated 248 eyes with CRAO, have not shown development of NVG in CRAO. Thus, their studies have shown no basis for development of NVG in CRAO (Hayreh and Podhajsky 1982). The reasons are:

  1. Equating CRAO with ischemic CRVO is a fundamental mistake because they have very different nature, cause, course and outcome. Published evidence indicates that chronically hypoxic retina, e.g., in diabetic retinopathy and/or ischemic CRVO, results in production and secretion of vasoproliferative factors such as VEGF, FGF and others, but that necrotic or infarcted retina, which results from CRAO, does not. Therefore, there is no scientific basis to expect solitary CRAO to produce ocular NV [Hayreh and Podhajsky 1982]. Hayreh and Zimmerman (2007), in their study of 248 eyes with CRAO, found that none of the eyes with CRAO alone developed ocular NV; however, in the setting of ocular ischemia or diabetic retinopathy, ocular NV was rarely found in CRAO [Hayreh and Zimmerman 2007]. In this study on CRAO, estimated probability of developing cilioretinal collaterals on the optic disc within 3 months was 32% (Hayreh SS, Zimmerman 2007); I have found that some of those collaterals have been misdiagnosed as disc NV.
  2. It is well established that an eye suffering from ocular ischemic syndrome is at high risk of developing ocular NV, including NVG (Hayreh and Podhajsky 1982; Mizener et al. 1997). These eyes are also at risk of developing CRAO and independently of developing NVG (Hayreh and Podhajsky 1982; Mizener et al. 1997). Therefore, the following scenarios may happen: Development of NVG in eyes with ocular ischemia results in a rise of intraocular pressure (IOP). Blood flow in the central retinal artery and retinal vascular bed depends upon the perfusion pressure (i.e. difference between the mean retinal arterial blood pressure and the intraocular pressure). In an eye with ocular ischemia, two things can happen at the same time: (i) a fall of mean blood pressure in the central retinal artery due to ocular ischemia, and (ii) a rise of IOP due to development of NVG. This is a fatal combination for the retinal and central retinal artery circulation, resulting in the development of secondary CRAO. This sequence of events is represented diagrammatically in figure 2. In addition to CRAO, these eyes may also develop anterior ischemic optic neuropathy and choroidal infarction (Hayreh and Podhajsky 1982; Mizener et al. 1997). It is also well established that blood pressure falls during sleep (i.e. nocturnal arterial hypotension – see below). When all these factors are put together, it is not surprising that the visual loss due to CRAO in these eyes is often discovered on waking up from sleep. In such cases, NVG has wrongly been considered as an effect of CRAO, when in fact it is the cause of CRAO.
    Fig. 2
    Diagrammatic representation of sequence of events in eyes with ocular ischemia. Branch retinal artery occlusion

In my study of more than 150 eyes with branch retinal artery occlusion, no eye developed any ocular NV, including NVG. The reason for not developing NVG in these eyes is the same as discussed above in CRAO.

2.1.3. Ocular ischemic syndrome

Ocular ischemic syndrome is a serious but uncommon blinding condition. It is a frustrating condition for the ophthalmologist. The visual prognosis and treatment outcomes are poor. There is no well-established treatment. Moreover, it may be overlooked or misdiagnosed, primarily because of its diverse and sometimes subtle presentation. Ocular ischemic syndrome can also masquerade several other ocular conditions. Mizener et al. (1997) in their study, on ocular ischemic syndrome in 39 eyes, found a variable range in the symptoms, signs, and course of the disease. Hayreh and Podhajsky (1982) have discussed its pathogenesis in detail. Ocular ischemic syndrome is caused by reduction of global blood flow to the eyeball, which can produce anterior and/or posterior segment ischemia. Anterior segment ischemia results in development of iris and angle NV and NVG. Most patients with ocular ischemic syndrome have severe carotid artery occlusive disease, but not all; it can be associated with vascular occlusive disease of the aortic arch, or of the ophthalmic, central retinal or ciliary arteries. It is not uncommon in clinical practice to find that carotid artery disease is ruled out as the cause of ocular ischemia based on findings of absence of occlusion or severe stenosis of the internal carotid artery on carotid Doppler. However, carotid Doppler evaluates only the artery in the neck and not above or below that, where it may be markedly stenosed. Hayreh and Dass (1962), in their anatomical studies on the ophthalmic artery, found on rare occasions that the ophthalmic artery was markedly stenosed at its origin, while the internal carotid artery was unobstructed and fully patent. Cerebral angiography or magnetic resonance angiography may be necessary to provide information which carotid Doppler cannot demonstrate, such as a significant stenosis in the carotid siphon or ophthalmic artery.

In the study of Mizener et al. (1997) on ocular ischemic syndrome, the prevalence of diabetes mellitus in these patients was much higher than in the comparable general population. Conventionally, retinal ischemia in the form of extensive retinal capillary non-perfusion (as seen for example in ischemic CRVO and diabetic retinopathy) is considered the exciting factor for the development of anterior segment NV and NVG. However, in that study, no patient with ocular ischemic syndrome and ocular NV had retinal capillary non-perfusion on fluorescein fundus angiography, not even those with diabetes mellitus. In contrast, in their studies in eyes with ocular ischemic syndrome, they have invariably found evidence of uveal vascular insufficiency [Hayreh and Podhajsky 1982; Mizener et al. 1997]. This was further confirmed by an experimental study in rhesus monkeys, where anterior segment NV (similar to that seen with ocular ischemic syndrome) developed with uveal ischemia alone, without any retinal ischemia (Hayreh and Baines 1973). These data suggest that uveal ischemia may be an important contributing factor for the NV seen in ocular ischemic syndrome.

2.2. Uncommon ocular causes of NVG

The following is a list of the diseases in which NVG has been reported sometimes. In many of them, the associated retinal ischemia seems to be the most likely factor for ocular NV.

2.2.1. Ocular radiation

There are large number of reports of development of NVG following radiation for a variety of ocular and orbital lesions, e.g., iris melanoma (Shields et al. 2003), posterior uveal melanomas (Shields et al. 2002), choroidal metastatic tumors (Tsina et al. 2005), retinoblastoma (Kingston et al. 1996), orbital lymphoma (Bhatia et al. 2002), and nasal and paranasal malignancies (Takeda et al. 1999). In ocular radiation, in most eyes the main factor responsible for the development of NVG most likely is the development of secondary radiation retinopathy, in which there is development of retinal capillary non-perfusion and retinal ischemia.

2.2.1. Ocular tumors

NVG has been reported in association with prior to treatment in ring melanoma of the anterior uvea (Allaire et al. 1997), adenocarcinoma of the nonpigmented ciliary epithelium (Terasaki et al. 2001), medulloepithelioma (Singh et al. 2001), circumscribed choroidal hemangioma (Shields et al. 2001a), metastatic cutaneous melanoma to the vitreous (Gunduz et al. 1998), retinoblastoma (De Potter 2002), and metastatic malignant lymphoma (Matsui et al. 2005).

2.2.3. Uveitis

Development of NVG has been observed following anterior as well as posterior uveitis. It is not known whether the stimulus for NV is from the inflammation or related secreted cellular products or may be a complication of underlying systemic diseases associated with uveitis, e.g., Whipple’s disease (Nishimura et al. 1998), Crohn’s disease (Salmon et al. 2000) and Behçet’s disease (Elgin et al. 2004).

2.2.4. Miscellaneous retinal diseases

These include retinal vasculitis per se or when it is associated with systemic diseases, such as Crohn’s disease (Salmon et al. 2000) and Behçet’s disease (Elgin et al. 2004). Other miscellaneous retinal conditions which may be associated with development of NVG include Coat’s disease (Shields et al. 2001b,c), Eales’ disease (Atmaca et al. 2002; Perentes et al. 2002), frosted branch angiitis (Seo et al. 1998), giant cell astrocytoma of the retina (Gunduz et al. 1999), peripheral retinal detachment (Barile et al. 1998), and X-linked retinoschisis (Rosenfeld et al. 1998). Similarly other system diseases, for example, cryoglobulinemia and Churg-Strauss syndrome, by causing retinal vascular occlusion can be associated with NVG


There is a large volume of literature on the subject of angiogenesis and NV and is beyond the scope of this discussion. However, a brief summary of the most pertinent information concerning ocular NV and NVG, especially to its clinical aspects, is warranted. Chen et al. (Chen et al. 1999) reported that increase in the inflammatory cytokine interleukin (IL) - 6 in aqueous humor correlated spatially and temporally with the grade of iris NV in patients of NVG secondary to CRVO. They postulated that the increased level of IL-6 might have a putative role, along with other angiogenic factors in angiogenesis of NVG.

Since 1996, several studies have implicated vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) as an important and likely the predominant factor in the pathogenesis of intraocular NV and NVG (Pe’er et al. 1996, 1998; Sone et al. 1996; Tolentino et al. 1996; Kozawa et al. 1998; Tripathi et al. 1998; Atmaca et al. 2002; Hu et al. 2002). Boyd et al. (2002) found a close temporal correlation between aqueous VEGF levels and the course of iris NV and permeability in ischemic CRVO, indicating that increased aqueous VEGF level may predict the need for treatment. Itakura et al. (2004) reported that in proliferative diabetic retinopathy a high VEGF level was maintained in the vitreous cavity after vitrectomy. They stated that their results suggest that there is persistent secretion of VEGF into the vitreous cavity even after vitrectomy in these eyes. This observation is supported by the experimental findings of ocular NV in rhesus monkeys, where Virdi and Hayreh (1982) found a correlation between retinal vascular leakage and the development of ocular NV.

The main reason for visual loss with high IOP in NVG is ischemia of the optic nerve head and/or retina. Blood flow in the various intraocular vascular beds can be calculated by using the following formula:


According to this formula and assuming no change in vascular resistance, a rise of IOP reduces the perfusion pressure and thus decreases the blood flow in the retina, choroid and optic nerve head. Therefore, the higher the IOP and the lower the blood pressure, the greater is the reduction of blood flow, and the worse the ischemic damage to the optic nerve head and retina, particularly the former. Thus, in the management of NVG, although lowering the IOP is crucial, one also has to make sure that the treatment does not lower the systemic arterial blood pressure.

Iris and angle NV almost invariably develops before the pressure rises. This is associated with the development of a fibrovascular membrane on the anterior surface of the iris and iridocorneal angle of anterior chamber. Membrane development is followed by development of progressive anterior synechiae, and angle closure, and precipitous rise of IOP, which may be of fairly acute onset. In some of the eyes, anterior segment NV may be associated with development of hyphema, which may contribute or precipitate an acute rise of IOP. It is worth remembering that the iridocorneal membrane may be difficult to visualize and that the angle may appear to be open and the IOP elevated before synechiae develop.


Advanced NVG is straightforward to diagnose. However, early in the course, NVG may present subtle findings and one must have a high index of suspicion of its development in the settings of various diseases discussed above (particularly ischemic CRVO, diabetic retinopathy and ocular ischemic syndrome). In addition, a careful examination of the iris and angle of the anterior chamber is essential, before the pupil is dilated and any drops put in the eye. Once the pupil is dilated, it may not be easy to find the NV. During the early stages, iris NV is essentially at the pupil margin and is very fine and delicate in character. Similarly, careful gonioscopy is essential to detect early angle NV and early anterior synechiae. The anterior chamber in these eyes often shows the presence of flare. Some time a few cells may be seen in the anterior chamber, which may erroneously be diagnosed as a sign of uveitis. Fluorescein iris angiography can be helpful in some doubtful cases because it shows leakage of fluorescein which is normally not seen. However, in a fully developed NVG with very high IOP, the clinical picture may be dramatically different; the eye may be painful and, when the IOP goes very high fairly fast, there is usually corneal epithelial edema which can make examination for iris and angle NV difficult.


From time to time, NVG has been confused with other ocular conditions. For example, eyes with severe non-granulomatous uveitis with dilated iris vessels and proteinous aqueous and high IOP can be misdiagnosed to have NVG. There are some eyes where normal iris vessels are seen easily, particularly in blue eyes, which may be mistaken for iris NV or even angle NV when the vessels are seen near the root of the iris. Eyes with carotid-cavernous fistula erroneously may be diagnosed to have NVG because of the blood in Schlemm’s canal, and elevated IOP.


This is highly challenging, unpredictable, difficult and controversial. It involves several considerations, including the following:

  1. Most importantly, it is essential to have a high index of suspicion of its development in the various diseases discussed above (particularly ischemic CRVO, diabetic retinopathy and ocular ischemic syndrome). Early treatment of those underlying diseases can reduce the development of NVG.
  2. A high index of suspicion of its development is also important for early diagnosis and treatment to prevent irreversible visual loss.
  3. Once NVG develops and the IOP is high, the major aspect of management is control of high IOP, which is almost invariably the main factor in irreversible and massive visual loss, rather than the original disease, which induced NVG.

Sivak-Callcott et al. (2001) conducted a review of the literature to evaluate evidence-based recommendations for treatment of NVG. They stated: “The current standard of care includes retinal ablation and control of increased intraocular pressure with medical and surgical therapy.” They concluded: “The current literature on neovascular glaucoma has few articles that provide strong evidence in support of therapy recommendations” based on the “data that provided strong evidence in support of clinical recommendation”.

We can divide the management of NVG into two categories: (1) management of the underlying disease and (2) management of high IOP when it develops.

6.1. Management of the underlying disease associated with NVG

As discussed above, the main diseases, which are responsible for inducing NVG, are diabetic retinopathy, ischemic CRVO and ocular ischemic syndrome. Management of these 3 conditions is discussed.

6.1.1. Management of diabetic retinopathy to prevent development of NVG

There is strong evidence that panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) is the treatment of choice for prevention of development of NVG in diabetic retinopathy (The Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group 1976). Recently, Bandello et al. (2006), in a series of nine patients, reported that intravitreal triamcinolone before PRP may be useful in improving the effect of PRP in eyes with proliferative diabetic retinopathy by reducing NV and retinal thickening.

6.1.2. Management of ischemic CRVO to prevent development of NVG

NVG is the most dreaded and blinding complication of ischemic CRVO. Unlike diabetic retinopathy, management of ischemic CRVO to prevent NVG is highly controversial. One reason for this longstanding controversy is that application of PRP for ischemic CRVO has been advocated by some based primarily upon the limited similarities in retinal vascular changes in diabetic retinopathy and ischemic CRVO. The controversy is increasingly confused since the role of growth factors in ischemic retinal disease has been elucidated. Clinically and in therapeutic response to PRP, ischemic CRVO and proliferative diabetic retinopathy behave very differently in nature and course (Hayreh 2003; Hayreh et al. 1990b). Role of PRP in NVG due to ischemic CRVO

The theoretical justification advocated for PRP in ischemic CRVO is, as in diabetic retinopathy, to prevent development of ocular NV and NVG. Some time ago, Hayreh et al. (1990b) reviewed the literature on the subject, and found flaws in most of the studies claiming beneficial effects of PRP in ischemic CRVO. For example, Magargal and co-workers (1981, 1982) claimed that not one of the 100 eyes treated by them with PRP developed NVG attributable to ischemic CRVO and “iris neovascularization subsequently regressed in each case” (Magargal et al. 1982). They concluded that “Prophylactic PRP in high-risk ischemic CRVO eyes appears to eliminate virtually the devastating complications of NVG” (Magargal et al. 1982). Yet no subsequent study has been able to confirm their enthusiastic claim.

Hayreh et al. (1990b) conducted the first long-term (10-year) prospective, planned study of argon laser PRP in a large group of ischemic CRVO eyes. They started this study in 1977, soon after the publication of the Diabetic Retinopathy Study (The Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group 1976) in 1976, which showed the beneficial effect of PRP in proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Their hypothesis at the start of the study was that they would find a similar beneficial response in ischemic CRVO, since both retinopathies share common features of retinal capillary non-perfusion and ocular NV. However, on completion of their study, on comparing the lasered eyes with the non-lasered eyes, they found to their complete surprise that there was NO statistically significant difference between the two groups in the incidence of development of angle NV, NVG, retinal and/or optic disc NV, or vitreous hemorrhage, or in visual acuity (in Fig. 3 both eyes developed iris NV in spite of PRP) (Hayreh et al. 1990b). This study did show, however, a statistically significant (p=0.04) difference in the incidence of iris NV between the two groups, with iris NV less prevalent in the lasered group than in the non-lasered group, but only when the PRP was performed within 3 months after the onset of CRVO; however, iris NV per se is of little clinical importance for the following reasons: (a) in one third of the eyes it does not progress to NVG (Fig. 1), and (b) in that study there was no significant difference in development of NVG between the lasered and control groups in spite of that difference in iris NV (Hayreh et al. 1983). The most important finding of this PRP study in ischemic CRVO was the statistically significant difference in the loss of peripheral visual fields between the lasered and non-lasered eyes - the lasered group suffered a significantly (p≤0.03) greater loss than the non-lasered group (Fig. 3). This showed that ischemic CRVO cannot be equated to diabetic retinopathy; Hayreh et al. (1990b) discussed the reasons for this disparity in response to PRP in the two diseases.

Fig. 3
Visual fields of 2 eyes with ischemic CRVO before and after PRP (Reproduced from Hayreh et al 1990b). (A). Visual fields of left eye of a 63-year-old man - top pre-PRP and bottom 6 months after PRP. The eye had 1754 argon laser burns, starting 81 days ...

A multicenter prospective clinical trial by “the Central Vein Occlusion Study” (CVOS) group investigated the role of PRP in ischemic CRVO (The Central Retinal Vein Occlusion Group 1995) to find out whether PRP prevents progression of iris/angle NV to NVG. The authors recommended “careful observation with frequent follow-up examinations in the early months (including undilated slit-lamp examination of the iris and gonioscopy) and prompt PRP of eyes in which 2’clock iris/angle NV develops.” Such a multicenter, multimillion-dollar study conducted under the aegis of the National Institutes of Health carries tremendous prestige, and the ophthalmic community considers its recommendations the “gold standard” in the management of ischemic CRVO. It is extremely important to place the results of this study in its true perspective; to do that, I pointed out the various flaws in the study and its conclusions (Hayreh 1996); briefly, they are as follows.

  1. Their baseline data (Central Vein Occlusion Study Group 1993) suggest that they had a mixture of ischemic and non-ischemic CRVO eyes in their designated two types of CRVO (i.e. “perfused” and “nonperfused” CRVO). Since ocular NV and NVG are a complication of ischemic CRVO but NOT of non-ischemic CRVO, information derived from such a mixture is likely to be inaccurate.
  2. Much more importantly, they treated all patients with iris NV, and did not randomize them to “treatment” or “no treatment” groups. That fact puts a serious cloud over its use of iris NV as an outcome measure for development of NVG. As shown by our study, approximately one third of the eyes with iris NV and treated with PRP would never have developed NVG (Fig. 1) (Hayreh et al. 1983). Treating all patients with iris NV strongly biased their results in favor of PRP. Also, in our study on PRP in ischemic CRVO, although eyes with PRP showed significantly (p=0.04) less prevalent iris NV in the PRP group as compared to the control group, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in angle NV and NVG (Hayreh et al. 1990b).
  3. Most importantly, on a risk/benefit ratio, it is essential to find out if a therapy has deleterious side effects. In the CVOS no visual fields were plotted so that information on the highly damaging effect of PRP on peripheral visual fields was missed. Our longitudinal studies in a large cohort of ischemic CRVO eyes have shown that, although all eyes have central scotoma, they almost invariably have normal peripheral visual fields. In our study (Hayreh et al. 1990b) on PRP in ischemic CRVO, we found a statistically significant (p≤0.03) worsening of peripheral visual fields, with marked loss in eyes treated with PRP as compared to those in the control non-lasered group; figure 3 includes some examples. After all, peripheral visual fields constitute a very important component of our visual function; our daily navigational capacity depends essentially upon them. Eyes with ischemic CRVO almost always have a large permanent central scotoma, resulting in poor central visual acuity. Following PRP, the large central scotoma combined with severe loss of peripheral visual fields may virtually blind the eye. This is a seriously blinding complication of PRP in ischemic CRVO.

It could be argued that this is simply my opinion (Hayreh 1996) about the CVOS; but the Editor of Ophthalmology (where this study was published) sent my comments to the authors of the CVOS Group and in their response (Central Vein Occlusion Study Group 1996) they agreed with all the concerns I had raised. Nevertheless, the ophthalmic community, unfortunately, still considers that study as the “gold standard”.

6.2. Management of ocular ischemic syndrome to prevent development of NVG

Management of ocular ischemic syndrome remains difficult and controversial. Reduction of blood flow to the eyeball can produce anterior and/or posterior segment ischemia (see Fig. 2). Anterior segment ischemia manifests as NV and NVG. As discussed above, in the ocular ischemic syndrome studies of Hayreh and Podhajsky (1982) and Mizener et al. (1997), no patient with ocular ischemic syndrome and ocular NV had retinal capillary non-perfusion on fluorescein fundus angiography, even those with diabetes mellitus; however, those studies invariably found evidence of uveal vascular insufficiency. Therefore, the conventional use of PRP for anterior segment NV and NVG in diabetic retinopathy cannot be extrapolated to ocular ischemic syndrome. Moreover, rise of IOP following PRP may further compromise the already highly precarious ocular and optic nerve head circulation and result in severe visual loss due to development of anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (Brown 1986) or retinal ischemia.

Since internal carotid artery occlusive disease is the most common cause of ocular ischemic syndrome, carotid endarterectomy seems a logical management. However, the benefit of carotid endarterectomy in patients with ocular ischemic syndrome is unknown and controversial. I reviewed the multiple reports in the literature dealing with this topic. Those described that, following carotid endarterectomy or internal-external carotid anastomosing procedure, there was stabilization of vision if initial vision was good, regression of iris NV, and, rarely, improvement in already poor vision (Mizener et al. 1997). Some studies showed that selected patients with asymptomatic severe carotid artery disease might benefit from carotid endarterectomy (Thompson 1993). In the study by Mizener et al. (1997), most patients with ocular ischemic syndrome who underwent carotid endarterectomy had poor vision and visual outcome was unchanged by the surgery. However, clinical decisions for carotid endarterectomy are usually driven by the patient’s entire clinical picture, as determined by neurologists and vascular surgeons.

Since, in ocular ischemic syndrome, perfusion pressure in the various ocular vascular beds is low, lowering IOP to as low a level as possible is crucial to improve the blood flow (Fig. 2), and thereby to prevent visual loss from various types of ocular vascular occlusion (including CRAO and anterior ischemic optic neuropathy) and/or glaucoma.

6.2.1. Role of nocturnal arterial hypotension in visual loss in ocular ischemic syndrome and NVG

Studies dealing with 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in ocular and optic nerve head ischemic disorders have shown that nocturnal arterial hypotension plays an important role in their pathogeneses, by lowering the perfusion pressure during sleep (Hayreh et al. 1994, 1999b; Hayreh 1999). These studies also showed that aggressive antihypertensive therapy, particularly administration of blood pressure lowering drugs in the evening or at bedtime, can result in marked nocturnal arterial hypotension, which may precipitate ischemic visual loss. For example, 73% of patients with non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy gave a history of discovering the visual loss on waking up from sleep (Hayreh et al. 1997). Similarly, in the study by Mizener et al. (1997) on ocular ischemic syndrome, some patients reported discovery of visual loss on waking up from sleep in the morning. Therefore, in patients with ocular ischemic syndrome, it is important to avoid nocturnal arterial hypotension. A study by Hayreh et al. (1999a) showed that topical beta-blockers eye drops produced significant nocturnal arterial hypotension. Therefore, it would be advisable to avoid beta-blocker eye drops for lowering the IOP in these patients. In patients who develop NVG from any cause, it is also important to avoid development of nocturnal arterial hypotension, to prevent visual loss. Unfortunately, the important role played by nocturnal arterial hypotension has not been stressed in the prevention of ocular ischemic conditions and NVG.

6.3. Management of inflammatory diseases associated with NVG

Eyes with uveitis and retinal vasculitis are at risk of developing NVG (see above). Thus, their appropriate management is important to prevent development of NVG. The treatment depends upon cause of these inflammatory diseases. In most of the eyes with uveitis, use of topical steroids and mydriatics are primary management; however, some of patients with uveitis require systemic corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive therapies. For retinal vasculitis, usually systemic corticosteroids are required, although some advocate using subtenon or intravitreal steroids. Since most of these patients have an associated systemic disease, management of that is also essential.


This can be done by medical or surgical methods.

6.4.1. Medical therapies

These are primarily meant to lower the IOP in eyes with NVG. However, more recently, other medical therapies aimed at treating intraocular NV have been reported. Medical treatments to control of high IOP

Different medical strategies have been tried to control NVG and the high IOP. This is invariably the first step to prevent visual loss and relieve pain or discomfort associated with NVG. IOP is lowered invariably by means of various aqueous suppressants (beta-blockers, alpha adrenergics, and carbonic anhydrase inhibitors). There is no role for cholinergic eye drops. Prostaglandins may not be of much help because they work by increasing the uveal outflow, which may be covered by a membrane. At the same time, it is helpful to give topical steroids to reduce any inflammatory component that may be present. Anti-VEGF therapy

As discussed above, there is evidence now that VEGF is an important factor in the pathogenesis of ocular NV and NVG. There are a large numbers of reports about the use of anti-VEGF therapy for choroidal neovascularization associated with age-related macular degeneration; however, only a few recent reports deal with its use in ocular NV and NVG, essentially with Bevacizumab (Avastin).

Most of the published reports deal with anti-VEGF therapy in ocular NV associated with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (Avery et al. 2006; Davidorf et al. 2006; Mason et al. 2006; Oshima et al. 2006; Spaide et al. 2006). Regression of retinal and iris NV (Avery et al. 2006 in 45 eyes), retinal and optic disc NV (Mason et al. 2006 in 3 patients), retinal NV (Spaide et al. 2006 in 2 patients), and iris NV (Davidorf et al. 2006 in one eye; Oshima et al. 2006 in 7 eyes) have been reported. Spaide et al. (2006) had to re-inject after 3 months because of reactivation of retinal NV. Grisanti et al. (2006) gave intracameral injection of 1.0 mg bevacizumab in 6 eyes with iris NV and claimed a decrease in leakage from the iris vessels on angiography. All the reports published so far show only a short-term beneficial effect of this treatment.

There is much less information about the role of anti-VEGF therapy in ocular NV and NVG associated with CRVO. Genaidy et al. (2002), in an experimental study on retinal vein occlusion in monkeys, found that intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy did not affect the development of iris NV. Iliev et al. (2006) gave intravitreal Avastin in 6 eyes with NVG associated with CRVO and reported marked regression of anterior segment NV within 48 hours in all and a “substantial” fall of IOP in 3 eyes, while the other 3 eyes required cyclophotocoagulation to control IOP on a follow-up of 4–16 weeks. Kahook et al. (2006) gave intravitreal bevacizumab (1.0 mg) to a patient with NVG following CRVO and reported “IOP improved within 2 days”.

Thus, so far the published experience is in only in a small number of eyes, except that of Avery et al. (2006), with extremely short follow-up and limited information on IOP control in NVG, other than that iris NV responded. As yet, there is no study providing definite information for long-term control of ocular NV and NVG and complications of the anti-VEGF therapy. As usual, there is invariably an initial marked enthusiasm with a new therapy in a disease with poor prognosis; it is only a long-term experience, which provides realistic information. Moreover, the success rate of this therapy in NVG may also depend upon the cause of NVG. For example, ocular NV and NVG associated with diabetic retinopathy are not as aggressive and sudden in onset as in ischemic CRVO, and that may influence the success and failure rates of this mode of treatment. Unfortunately, no such information is available in the reported series so far. However, a decrease in iris and angle NV can permit safer surgical intervention. Corticosteroid therapy

Jonas et al. (2001) in 4 eyes with NVG gave intravitreal injection of 20 mg of crystalline triamcinolone acetonide and found the mean IOP decreased from 26.5± 12.1 mm Hg to 21.75±11.3 mmHg; however, in one of the eyes with IOP of 40 mm Hg, there was no change although iris NV decreased.

In conclusion, so far, information on anti-VEGF and corticosteroid therapy in NVG is available from only a few anecdotal reports, and no worthwhile conclusions can be drawn about their beneficial effect in controlling IOP and preventing visual loss, and their complications. The primary medical management still remains the use of drugs that lower the IOP.

6.4.2. Surgical methods to control high IOP

If medical methods do not control IOP in NVG, then one has to resort to surgery. A variety of such methods have been advocated with differing claims, as is evident from the following. In these eyes, there is no role for laser trabeculoplasty because there is no visible trabecular meshwork. Cycloablation

This has been oldest of the surgical procedures used to try to control high IOP in NVG. Various such methods have been used for this purpose. The objective of this mode of treatment is to try to reduce the formation of aqueous by partially destroying the ciliary body. Initially cyclodiathermy was the most popular mode of doing that but this frequently had post-operative complications. That was later replaced by cyclocryotherapy, which has much less post-operative complications. Another similar procedure advocated in the past was cyclo-electrolysis. However, since 1997 (Bloom et al. 1997), for cycloablation various cyclophotocoagulation methods have been advocated. Cyclophotocoagulation

A report on cyclophotocoagulation by the American Academy of Ophthalmology showed that transscleral cyclophotocoagulation with noncontact Nd:YAG and semiconductor diode laser is useful in acute-onset NVG (Pastor et al. 2001). Cyclophotocoagulation with a diode laser compared to cyclocryoablation has the advantage that it causes less pain and is better tolerated by the patients; however, in my experience it takes longer to lower the IOP. Oguri et al. (1998) reported that diode laser transscleral cyclophotocoagulation appears to be as effective as free-running mode Nd:YAG laser transscleral cyclophotocoagulation and better than continuous-wave mode Nd:YAG laser transscleral cyclophotocoagulation for treating NVG. However, there are reports of complications of laser cyclophotocoagulation, the most common being hypotony. Yap-Veloso et al. (1998) reported that 26% of eyes had severe long-term complications, including loss of vision (22%), corneal decompensation (2%), and phthisis bulbi (2%). Development of necrotizing scleritis 10 months after diode laser cyclophotocoagulation for NVG has been reported (Shen et al. 2004). Delgado et al. (2003) reported that use of noncontact transscleral neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet cyclophotocoagulation for NVG in 115 eyes, while providing long-term IOP reduction, was associated with complications that included inflammation, visual loss, and hypotony, and that repeat treatments may be necessary to main good control of IOP. Filtering surgery

The most common filtering procedure tried has been trabeculectomy combined with or without mitomycin C or 5-fluororacil. Elgin et al. (2006) claimed that trabeculectomy with mitomycin C combined with direct cauterization of peripheral iris in NVG decreased the incidence of both intraoperative bleeding and early postoperative hyphema, and provided reduction of IOP and the number of antiglaucomatous medications in 96% at one week, 86% at one month, 83% at 3 months and 66% at 6 months, in cases with a 6-month follow-up period. Kiuchi et al. (2006) found that pars plana vitrectomy, followed by PRP and trabeculectomy with mitomycin C in eyes with NVG associated with diabetic retinopathy effectively reduced the elevated IOP. Kono et al. (2005) performed pars plana vitrectomy combined with filtering surgery and claimed success in control of IOP for more than 12 months. By contrast, Mietz et al. (1999) found that trabeculectomy without antimetabolites failed to control IOP in 80% of eyes with NVG. Thus, there are conflicting claims, and it seems the effectiveness of these procedures decreases with time. There are several limitations in the reported studies to provide definite information for long-term control of IOP. For example, in all of them the follow-up was only 12 months or less. Moreover, the success rate of these procedures in NVG may also depend upon the cause of NVG. For example, NVG associated with diabetic retinopathy is not as aggressive and sudden in onset as in ischemic CRVO, and that may influence the success and failure rates of these procedures. Unfortunately, no such information is available in the reported series, where NVG from various causes were usually lumped together. Glaucoma drainage devices

Glaucoma drainage devices have been considered as an option in the management of NVG where there is a high risk of failure from conventional filtering surgery. Various drainage devices used have been Molteno implant, Baerveldt implant, Ahmed glaucoma valve and Krupin valve. Different reports make conflicting claims about the success of different devices to control IOP in NVG. For example, Every et al. (2006) in a prospective study of 145 eyes followed up for a mean of 3.3 years found Molteno implant to control the IOP at ≤21 mm Hg up to 5 years, but the success rate progressively decreased from one year onwards. Failure to control IOP was significantly correlated with persistent iris NV. Broadway et al. (2001) found that, in the long term, Molteno implant tended to fare poorly in NVG. Krishna et al. (2001) claimed that the 350-mm(2) Baerveldt glaucoma implants are a safe and effective treatment for intermediate-term IOP control in patients with NVG. According to Yalvac et al. (2006), the Ahmed glaucoma valve and Molteno single-plate implant were successful for early and intermediate-term of IOP control but in the long term both implants failed to achieve control of IOP. Hong et al. (2005) recently reviewed the literature on various glaucoma drainage devices and compared their success rate in controlling IOP. They concluded that the Moltino implant, Baerveldt implant, Ahmed glaucoma valve and Krupin valve showed no statistically significant difference in either the percentage change in IOP or the overall surgical success rate at the last follow up. One has to bear in mind that each glaucoma drainage device has its own complications and limitations. Placing a glaucoma drainage device in an eye with 360 degrees of synechiae is technically challenging and the fibrovascular membrane can encase the tube. Photodynamic therapy

In 1984, in an experimental study in rhesus monkeys with iris NV, Packer et al. (1984) reported marked reduction of leakage from iris NV on fluorescein angiography after photodynamic therapy, but the effect was temporary and required repeated application to control iris NV. Parodi and Iacono (2005) recently reported that photodynamic therapy might be a promising approach for NVG. In their series of 16 eyes with NVG, there was a 39% decrease in IOP overall and treatment did not control IOP satisfactorily in 31%.

6.4.3. Management of painful blind eyes

To make the eye feel comfortable, it is advisable to try first topical corticosteroids, cycloplegics, cyclodestruction, and even alcohol injection. If all else fails, as a last resort one may consider enucleation. Our policy is to try to avoid doing enucleation whenever possible, because even a blind eye is less bothersome in the long run (if cosmetically acceptable) than to maintain an artificial eye and socket. Some ophthalmologists advocate doing evisceration of such eyes.

While control of IOP helps to prevent visual loss in NVG, one has to keep in mind that visual outcome also depends upon the severity of underlying ocular disease and postoperative complications. Thus, successful control of IOP does not always correspond with visual outcome in NVG.


Finally, based on our studies on NVG in CRVO and ocular ischemic syndrome, in the Ocular Vascular Clinic at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, since 1973, I will discuss our management regimen of NVG.

6.5.1. In ischemic CRVO and NVG

As discussed above, PRP study by Hayreh et al. (1990b) in ischemic CRVO showed no significant difference in the development of NVG between the treated and the control group. I discussed above the serious flaws with the conclusions of the multicenter CVOS about the role of PRP (Hayreh 1996). Naturally, the question arises: if none of the advocated treatments is beneficial in ischemic CRVO, how should patients with ischemic CRVO be managed? I have discussed this topic in detail elsewhere (Hayreh 2003).

For a logical management of any disease, one has first to understand the basic issue involved and the available information, which should act as guidelines. In ischemic CRVO, to reiterate briefly what has been said above, we currently have the following definite information:

  1. A maximum of about 45% of ischemic CRVO patients are likely to develop NVG and 55% are never going to develop it (Fig. 1) [Hayreh et al. 1983].
  2. The risk of developing NVG exists mainly during the first 7–8 months of the disease (about 40% - Fig. 1) (Hayreh et al. 1983). After that, the risk falls dramatically to about 5% or less. Therefore, the crucial period to monitor these patents closely is the first 7–8 months (Hayreh et al. 1983).
  3. The multi-center CRVO photocoagulation study showed that prophylactic PRP in ischemic CRVO does not prevent iris and angle NV (The Central Retinal Vein Occlusion Group 1995).
  4. PRP study by Hayreh et al. (1990b) showed that eyes subjected to PRP usually suffer marked loss of peripheral visual fields (Fig. 3). Combined with the large pre-existing central scotoma in these eyes, that marked peripheral visual field loss can make these eyes virtually blind.
  5. There is no convincing scientific evidence that PRP usually helps prevent development of NVG in ischemic CRVO, in spite of claims to that effect (The Central Retinal Vein Occlusion Group 1995).
  6. The retinopathy in ischemic CRVO runs a self-limited course, and after a variable length of time, it usually burns itself out and resolves spontaneously, with permanent residual retinal damage. Once that happens, the stimulus for NV disappears and consequently the anterior segment NV spontaneously starts to regress. Virdi and Hayreh (1982) showed that in their experimental study also. This highly important fact is usually not appreciated in the management of these eyes. An understanding of this important fact must change our approach to the management of ischemic CRVO and associated anterior segment NV. We need to “babysit” these eyes during the period when they are at maximum risk of developing NVG, i.e. the first 7–8 months (Fig. 1). From my own experience, I can safely say that “baby sitting” is generally not a pleasant experience for either the ophthalmologist or the anxious patient, but in the end, it pays off by preserving the peripheral visual fields in the majority.

The most important fact to bear in mind in the management of NVG in ischemic CRVO is that the primary factor, which is going to completely blind these eyes, is the high IOP, producing optic nerve head damage, and NOT the ischemic CRVO per se. If one can keep the IOP under control by any means available, one can keep their peripheral visual fields intact. In the light of these facts, I follow the following regimen with these patients:

  1. I follow them every 2–3 weeks in my clinic for the first 7–8 months, to watch for any evidence of anterior segment NV and rise of IOP, as well as doing gonioscopy. Every 2 months or so, I do a complete ophthalmic evaluation and visual field plotting with a Goldman perimeter.
  2. If an eye develops moderate to marked anterior segment NV, I start topical corticosteroid therapy, because there is evidence that steroids inhibit angiogenesis and NV. (Warning: Topical corticosteroids in steroid responders may cause the IOP to go high and that may be misdiagnosed as NVG. Performing gonioscopy would prevent such a mistake. I am not aware of any information whether in eyes with completely closed angle, use of topical steroid therapy may have similar IOP raising effect or not.)
  3. If the IOP goes above 21 mmHg, I start topical ocular hypotensive therapy. If need be, I may add oral carbonic anhydrase inhibitors also. Most of the time, this medical treatment regimen is enough to keep the IOP under satisfactory control.
  4. If the IOP goes very high and is not controlled by the medical regimen, then we do graduated cycloablation (previously by graduated cyclocryotherapy and more recently by cyclophotocoagulation with diode laser). This, combined with medical therapy, can control the IOP in majority of the eyes. Some eyes require repeated cycloablation to keep the IOP under control. The universal impression that cycloablation invariably results in hypotony and phthisis bulbi is based on aggressive 360° application at one sitting. Our study showed that a graduated cycloablation over a period of time, titrated according to the IOP, is generally not associated with hypotony or phthisis bulbi. There are a few cases where we have put glaucoma drainage devices to manage elevated IOP in eyes with closed angle and very minimal or no NV.
    With this treatment regimen, I have been able to tide many of these eyes over the first 7–8 months, or until the retinopathy starts to resolve and the stimulus for anterior segment NV subsides. After that, these eyes start to settle down. However, a few eyes very rapidly go into fulminant NVG and no amount of any treatment can control the IOP. In our studies on PRP (Hayreh et al. 1990b) some eyes developed fulminant NVG in spite of early and extensive PRP of up to about 3,500 burns; they finally became totally blind and even developed phthisis bulbi.
  5. If the eyes do not develop NVG during the first 7 months, their risk thereafter is minimal (Fig. 1). Therefore, after that, I follow them every 3 months or so, depending upon the state of the eye. I have found that some of the eyes that do not develop NVG may develop disc or retinal NV at a much later stage (Fig. 1). If that happens, then I do advocate the PRP, since by that time the retinal edema and hemorrhages are much less or even absent, and consequently PRP is not so destructive to the peripheral visual fields as during the early stages when there are extensive retinal hemorrhages and marked retinal edema.

6.5.2. In ocular ischemic syndrome

As in NVG due to any cause, our first priority is to lower the IOP to prevent further visual loss, particularly since in these eyes perfusion pressure in the ocular vascular bed is already low (Fig. 2). To do that, we use IOP lowering eye drops, along with topical steroids, and if need be add systemic carbonic anhydrase inhibitors. We avoid using beta-blocker eye drops because of their arterial hypotensive effect (Hayreh et al. 1999a). Cycloplegics may be useful to decrease ciliary pain and prevent posterior synechiae. If the IOP is uncontrolled with these measures, as with extensive peripheral anterior synechiae formation, or the medications are not tolerated, we do graduated cycloablation (see above) in addition to the above measures. Out of 30 eyes in our study (Mizener et al. 1997), 18 developed NVG but only four patients required cycloablation. In our series, only one eye developed phthisis bulbi, and this blind, painful eye required a retrobulbar alcohol injection after cycloablation failed to give relief.


NVG is a severely blinding disease. To prevent or reduce the extent of visual loss caused by NVG, the first essential is to have a high index of suspicion of its development; if NVG develops, early diagnosis and aggressive control of high IOP is crucial to minimize the visual loss. The most common diseases responsible for development of NVG are ischemic CRVO, diabetic retinopathy and ocular ischemic syndrome. In the management strategy, the first priority should be to try to prevent its development by appropriate management of the causative diseases.

Currently there is no satisfactory means of treating NVG and preventing visual loss in the majority, in spite of multiple modes of medical and surgical options advocated over the years and claims made. Currently our ability to prevent NVG and treat it is not satisfactory. For that, the primary aim of our future research should be prevention of the development of anterior segment NV and NVG. Primarily advances in basic sciences, which enable us to understand the disease process, make advances in medicine. As a clinical scientist, I have found that once one understands the basic scientific facts about a disease and its pathogenesis, one can almost mathematically calculate whether a particular treatment is going to work or not. Unfortunately, the major problem in clinical medicine has been lack of adequate knowledge of those basic scientific facts about the disease process among clinicians who invariably manage them and advocate various therapies. Not infrequently, with the best of intentions, treatment methods without any scientific rationale are advocated which in the long run not only do not work but even can be harmful. Thus, in the management of NVG, we first need scientifically valid means of management of the main diseases, which cause NVG, i.e. ischemic CRVO, diabetic retinopathy and ocular ischemic syndrome. While conventionally PRP has been advocated for the prevention and management of NVG in these diseases, as discussed above, apart from its effectiveness in diabetic retinopathy, it has been shown that not only it may not be effective in preventing NVG in ischemic CRVO and ocular ischemic syndrome but also it can cause further visual loss. After all, PRP is basically a destructive procedure. Currently there is considerable interest in the anti-VEGF drugs for management of ocular NV in age-related macular degeneration, but, so far, we have little long-term worthwhile information in a large series of patients about its effectiveness in prevention or control of NVG or ocular NV elsewhere. Various medical means to control high IOP are usually only temporary measures. Claims about the success of various surgical means to control IOP in NVG have not yet been substantiated in the long run. Thus, we are still far from having a satisfactory management method to prevent and treat NVG, to prevent visual loss.


I am grateful to my colleagues Drs. Wallace L.M. Alward, Young H. Kwon and Stephen R. Russell for valuable suggestions.



For comprehensive bibliography on he various topics, please consult the full bibliography given in the references listed above.


  • Allaire GS, Corriveau C, Boileau M. Ring melanoma of the anterior uvea presenting as unilateral neovascular glaucoma. Can J Ophthalmol. 1997;32:338–341. [PubMed]
  • Atmaca LS, Batioglu F, Atmaca Sonmez P. A long-term follow-up of Eales’ disease. Ocul Immunol Inflamm. 2002;10:213–221. [PubMed]
  • Avery RL, Pearlman J, Pieramici DJ, Rabena MD, Castellarin AA, Nasir MA, Giust MJ, Wendel R, Patel A. Intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin) in the treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:1695.e1–15. [PubMed]
  • Bandello F, Polito A, Pognuz DR, Monaco P, Dimastrogiovanni A, Paissios J. Triamcinolone as adjunctive treatment to laser panretinal photocoagulation for proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124:643–650. [PubMed]
  • Barile GR, Chang S, Horowitz JD, Reppucci VS, Schiff WM, Wong DT. Neovascular complications associated with rubeosis iridis and peripheral retinal detachment after retinal detachment surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;126:379–389. [PubMed]
  • Bhatia S, Paulino AC, Buatti JM, Mayr NA, Wen BC. Curative radiotherapy for primary orbital lymphoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;54:818–823. [PubMed]
  • Bloom PA, Tsai JC, Sharma K, Miller MH, Rice NS, Hitchings RA, Khaw PT. “Cyclodiode”. Trans-scleral diode laser cyclophotocoagulation in the treatment of advanced refractory glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1997;104:1508–1519. [PubMed]
  • Boyd SR, Zachary I, Chakravarthy U, Allen GJ, Wisdom GB, Cree IA, Martin JF, Hykin PG. Correlation of increased vascular endothelial growth factor with neovascularization and permeability in ischemic central vein occlusion. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:1644–1650. [PubMed]
  • Broadway DC, Lester M, Schulzer M, Douglas GR. Survival analysis for success of Molteno tube implants. Br J Ophthalmol. 2001;85:689–695. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Brown GC. Anterior ischemic optic neuropathy occurring in association with carotid artery obstruction. J Clin Neuroophthalmol. 1986;6:29–42. [PubMed]
  • Central Vein Occlusion Study Group. Baseline and early natural history report - The central vein occlusion study. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;111:1087–1095. [PubMed]
  • Central Vein Occlusion Study Group. The CVOS Group M and N Reports. Ophthalmology. 1996;103:353–354.
  • Chen KH, Wu CC, Roy S, Lee SM, Liu JH. Increased interleukin-6 in aqueous humor of neovascular glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999;40:2627–2632. [PubMed]
  • Davidorf FH, Mouser JG, Derick RJ. Rapid improvement of rubeosis iridis from a single bevacizumab (Avastin) injection. Retina. 2006;26:354–356. [PubMed]
  • De Potter P. Current treatment of retinoblastoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2002;13:331–336. [PubMed]
  • Delgado MF, Dickens CJ, Iwach AG, Novack GD, Nychka DS, Wong PC, Nguyen N. Long-term results of noncontact neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet cyclophotocoagulation in neovascular glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:895–899. [PubMed]
  • Elgin U, Berker N, Batman A. Incidence of secondary glaucoma in Behcet disease. J Glaucoma. 2004;13:441–444. [PubMed]
  • Elgin U, Berker N, Batman A, Simsek T, Cankaya B. Trabeculectomy with mitomycin C combined with direct cauterization of peripheral iris in the management of neovascular glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2006;15:466–470. [PubMed]
  • Every SG, Molteno AC, Bevin TH, Herbison P. Long-term results of Molteno implant insertion in cases of neovascular glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124:355–360. [PubMed]
  • Genaidy M, Kazi AA, Peyman GA, Passos-Machado E, Farahat HG, Williams JI, Holroyd KJ, Blake DA. Effect of squalamine on iris neovascularization in monkeys. Retina. 2002;22:772–778. [PubMed]
  • Grisanti S, Biester S, Peters S, Tatar O, Ziemssen F, Bartz-Schmidt KU. Tuebingen Bevacizumab Study Group. Intracameral bevacizumab for iris rubeosis. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;142:158–160. [PubMed]
  • Gunduz K, Eagle RC, Jr, Shields CL, Shields JA, Augsburger JJ. Invasive giant cell astrocytoma of the retina in a patient with tuberous sclerosis. Ophthalmology. 1999;106:639–642. [PubMed]
  • Gunduz K, Shields JA, Shields CL, Eagle RC., Jr Cutaneous melanoma metastatic to the vitreous cavity. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:600–605. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS. Occlusion of the central retinal vessels. Br J Ophthalmol. 1965;49:626–645. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS. So-called ‘central retinal vein occlusion’ I. Pathogenesis, terminology, clinical features. Ophthalmologica. 1976;172:1–13. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS. Classification of central retinal vein occlusion. Ophthalmology. 1983;90:458–474. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS. Retinal vein occlusion. Ind J Ophthalmol. 1994;42:109–132. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS. The CVOS Group M and N Reports. Ophthalmology. 1996;103:350–352. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS. Role of nocturnal arterial hypotension in the development of ocular manifestations of systemic arterial hypertension. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 1999;10:474–482. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS. Management of central retinal vein occlusion. Ophthalmologica. 2003;217:167–188. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS. Prevalent misconceptions about acute retinal vascular occlusive disorders. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2005;24:493–519. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS, Baines JAB. Occlusion of the vortex veins - An experimental study. B J Ophthalmol. 1973;57:217–238. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS, Dass R. The ophthalmic artery I. Origin and intra-cranial and intra-canalicular course. Br J Ophthalmol. 1962;46:65–98. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS, Hayreh MS. Hemi-central retinal vein occlusion. Pathogenesis, clinical features, and natural history. Arch Ophthalmol. 1980;98:1600–1609. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS, Klugman MR, Beri M, Kimura AE, Podhajsky P. Differentiation of ischemic from non-ischemic central retinal vein occlusion during the early acute phase. Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol. 1990a;228:201–217. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS, Klugman MR, Podhajsky P, Servais GE, Perkins ES. Argon laser panretinal photocoagulation in ischemic central retinal vein occlusion - A 10-year prospective study. Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol. 1990b;228:281–296. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS, Podhajsky P. Ocular neovascularization with retinal vascular occlusion II. Occurrence in central and branch retinal artery occlusion. Arch Ophthalmol. 1982;100:1585–1596. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS, Podhajsky PA, Zimmerman B. Non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy Time of onset of visual loss. Am J Ophthalmol. 1997;124:641–647. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS, Podhajsky PA, Zimmerman B. Beta-Blocker eye drops and nocturnal arterial hypotension. Am J Ophthalmol. 1999a;128:301–309. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS, Podhajsky PA, Zimmerman B. Role of nocturnal arterial hypotension in optic nerve head ischemic disorders. Ophthalmologica. 1999b;213:76–96. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS, Rojas P, Podhajsky P, Montague P, Woolson RF. Ocular neovascularization with retinal vascular occlusion III. Incidence of ocular neovascularization with retinal vein occlusion. Ophthalmology. 1983;90:488–506. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS, Zimmerman MB. Fundus Changes in Central Retinal Artery Occlusion. Retina. 2007;27:276–289. [PubMed]
  • Hayreh SS, Zimmerman MB, Podhajsky P, Alward WLM. Nocturnal arterial hypotension and its role in optic nerve head and ocular ischemic disorders. Am J Ophthalmol. 1994;117:603–624. [PubMed]
  • Hong CH, Arosemena A, Zurakowski D, Ayyala RS. Glaucoma drainage devices: a systematic literature review and current controversies. Surv Ophthalmol. 2005;50:48–60. [PubMed]
  • Hu DN, Ritch R, Liebmann J, Liu Y, Cheng B, Hu MS. Vascular endothelial growth factor is increased in aqueous humor of glaucomatous eyes. J Glaucoma. 2002;11:406–410. [PubMed]
  • Iliev ME, Domig D, Wolf-Schnurrbursch U, Wolf S, Sarra G. Intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin) in the treatment of neovascular glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;142:1054–1056. [PubMed]
  • Itakura H, Kishi S, Kotajima N, Murakami M. Persistent secretion of vascular endothelial growth factor into the vitreous cavity in proliferative diabetic retinopathy after vitrectomy. Ophthalmology. 2004;111:1880–1884. [PubMed]
  • Jonas JB, Hayler JK, Sofker A, Panda-Jonas S. Regression of neovascular iris vessels by intravitreal injection of crystalline cortisone. J Glaucoma. 2001;10:284–287. [PubMed]
  • Kahook MY, Schuman JS, Noecker RJ. Intravitreal bevacizumab in a patient with neovascular glaucoma. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2006;37:144–146. [PubMed]
  • Kingston JE, Hungerford JL, Madreperla SA, Plowman PN. Results of combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced intraocular retinoblastoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1996;114:1339–1343. [PubMed]
  • Kiuchi Y, Nakae K, Saito Y, Ito S, Ito N. Pars plana vitrectomy and panretinal photocoagulation combined with trabeculectomy for successful treatment of neovascular glaucoma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2006;244:1627–1632. [PubMed]
  • Kono T, Shiga S, Takesue Y, Sakamoto T. Long-term results of pars plana vitrectomy combined with filtering surgery for neovascular glaucoma. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2005;36:211–216. [PubMed]
  • Kozawa T, Sone H, Okuda Y, Kawakami Y, Sekine Y, Imai M, Hommura S, Inatomi M, Yaguchi S, Matsuo K, Segawa T, Suzuki H, Yamashita K. Vascular endothelial growth factor levels in the aqueous and serum in diabetic retinopathy with or without neovascular glaucoma. Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi. 1998;102:731–738. [PubMed]
  • Krishna R, Godfrey DG, Budenz DL, Escalona-Camaano E, Gedde SJ, Greenfield DS, Feuer W, Scott IU. Intermediate-term outcomes of 350-mm(2) Baerveldt glaucoma implants. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:621–626. [PubMed]
  • Magargal LE, Brown GC, Augsburger JJ, Donoso LA. Efficacy of panretinal photocoagulation in preventing neovascular glaucoma following ischemic central retinal vein obstruction. Ophthalmology. 1982;89:780–784. [PubMed]
  • Magargal LE, Brown GC, Augsburger JJ, Parrish RK. Neovascular glaucoma following central retinal vein obstruction. Ophthalmology. 1981;88:1095–1101. [PubMed]
  • Mason JO, Nixon PA, White MF. Intravitreal injection of bevacizumab (Avastin) as adjunctive treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;142:685–688. [PubMed]
  • Matsui N, Kamao T, Azumi A. Case of metastatic intraocular malignant lymphoma with neovascular glaucoma. Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi. 2005;109:434–439. [PubMed]
  • Mietz H, Raschka B, Krieglstein GK. Risk factors for failures of trabeculectomies performed without antimetabolites. Br J Ophthalmol. 1999;83:814–821. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Mizener JB, Podhajsky P, Hayreh SS. Ocular ischemic syndrome. Ophthalmology. 1997;104:859–864. [PubMed]
  • Nishimura JK, Cook BE, Jr, Pach JM. Whipple disease presenting as posterior uveitis without prominent gastrointestinal symptoms. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;126:130–132. [PubMed]
  • Oguri A, Takahashi E, Tomita G, Yamamoto T, Jikihara S, Kitazawa Y. Transscleral cyclophotocoagulation with the diode laser for neovascular glaucoma. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers. 1998;29:722–727. [PubMed]
  • Oshima Y, Sakaguchi H, Gomi F, Tano Y. Regression of iris neovascularization after intravitreal injection of bevacizumab in patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;142:155–158. [PubMed]
  • Packer AJ, Tse DT, Gu XQ, Hayreh SS. Hematoporphyrin photoradiation therapy for iris neovascularization. A preliminary report. Arch Ophthalmol. 1984;102:1193–1197. [PubMed]
  • Parodi MB, Lacono P. Photodynamic therapy for neovascular glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2005;112:1844–1845. [PubMed]
  • Pastor SA, Singh K, Lee DA, Juzych MS, Lin SC, Netland PA, Nguyen NT. Cyclophotocoagulation: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:2130–2138. [PubMed]
  • Pe’er J, Folberg R, Itin A, Gnessin H, Hemo I, Keshet E. Upregulated expression of vascular endothelial growth factor in proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Br J Ophthalmol. 1996;80:241–245. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Pe’er J, Folberg R, Itin A, Gnessin H, Hemo I, Keshet E. Vascular endothelial growth factor upregulation in human central retinal vein occlusion. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:412–416. [PubMed]
  • Perentes Y, Chan CC, Bovey E, Uffer S, Herbort CP. Massive vascular endothelium growth factor (VEGF) expression in Eales’ disease. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd. 2002;219:311–314. [PubMed]
  • Rosenfeld PJ, Flynn HW, Jr, McDonald HR, Rubsamen PE, Smiddy WE, Sipperley JO, Boniuk I, Packer AJ. Outcomes of vitreoretinal surgery in patients with X-linked retinoschisis. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers. 1998;29:190–197. [PubMed]
  • Salmon JF, Ursell PG, Frith P. Neovascular glaucoma as a complication of retinal vasculitis in Crohn disease. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;130:528–530. [PubMed]
  • Seo MS, Woo JM, Jeong SK, Park YG. Recurrent unilateral frosted branch angiitis. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 1998;42:56–59. [PubMed]
  • Shen SY, Lai JS, Lam DS. Necrotizing scleritis following diode laser transscleral cyclophotocoagulation. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2004;35:251–253. [PubMed]
  • Shields CL, Honavar SG, Shields JA, Cater J, Demirci H. Circumscribed choroidal hemangioma: clinical manifestations and factors predictive of visual outcome in 200 consecutive cases. Ophthalmology. 2001a;108:2237–2248. [PubMed]
  • Shields CL, Naseripour M, Cater J, Shields JA, Demirci H, Youseff A, Freire J. Plaque radiotherapy for large posterior uveal melanomas (> or =8-mm thick) in 354 consecutive patients. Ophthalmology. 2002;109:1838–1849. [PubMed]
  • Shields CL, Naseripour M, Shields JA, Freire J, Cater J. Custom-designed plaque radiotherapy for nonresectable iris melanoma in 38 patients: tumor control and ocular complications. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;135:648–656. [PubMed]
  • Shields JA, Shields CL, Honavar SG, Demirci H. Clinical variations and complications of Coats disease in 150 cases. Am J Ophthalmol. 2001b;131:561–571. [PubMed]
  • Shields JA, Shields CL, Honavar SG, Demirci H, Cater J. Classification and management of Coats disease: the 2000 Proctor Lecture. Am J Ophthalmol. 2001c;131:572–583. [PubMed]
  • Singh A, Singh AD, Shields CL, Shields JA. Iris neovascularization in children as a manifestation of underlying medulloepithelioma. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2001;38:224–228. [PubMed]
  • Sivak-Callcott JA, O’Day DM, Gass JD, Tsai JC. Evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of neovascular glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:1767–1776. [PubMed]
  • Sone H, Okuda Y, Kawakami Y, Hanatani M, Suzuki H, Kozawa T, Honmura S, Yamashita K. Vascular endothelial growth factor level in aqueous humor of diabetic patients with rubeotic glaucoma is markedly elevated. Diabetes Care. 1996;19:1306–1307. [PubMed]
  • Spaide RF, Fisher YL. Intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin) treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy complicated by vitreous hemorrhage. Retina. 2006;26:275–278. [PubMed]
  • Takeda A, Shigematsu N, Suzuki S, Fujii M, Kawata T, Kawaguchi O, Uno T, Takano H, Kubo A, Ito H. Late retinal complications of radiation therapy for nasal and paranasal malignancies: relationship between irradiated-dose area and severity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;44:599–605. [PubMed]
  • Terasaki H, Nagasaka T, Arai M, Harada T, Miyake Y. Adenocarcinoma of the nonpigmented ciliary epithelium: report of two cases with immunohistochemical findings. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2001;239:876–881. [PubMed]
  • The Central Retinal Vein Occlusion Group. A randomized clinical trial of early panretinal photocoagulation for ischemic central vein occlusion - The central vein occlusion study group N report. Ophthalmology. 1995;102:1434–1444. [PubMed]
  • The Central Vein Occlusion Study. Natural history and clinical management of central retinal vein occlusion. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115:486–491. [PubMed]
  • The Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group. Preliminary report on effects of photocoagulation therapy. Am J Ophthalmol. 1976;81:383–396. [PubMed]
  • Thompson JE. Carotid endarterectomy for asymptomatic stenosis: benefits confirmed by randomized trial. J Vasc Surg. 1993;17:798–800. [PubMed]
  • Tolentino MJ, Miller JW, Gragoudas ES, Chatzistefanou K, Ferrara N, Adamis AP. Vascular endothelial growth factor is sufficient to produce iris neovascularization and neovascular glaucoma in a nonhuman primate. Arch Ophthalmol. 1996;114:964–970. [PubMed]
  • Tripathi RC, Li J, Tripathi BJ, Chalam KV, Adamis AP. Increased level of vascular endothelial growth factor in aqueous humor of patients with neovascular glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:232–237. [PubMed]
  • Tsina EK, Lane AM, Zacks DN, Munzenrider JE, Collie JM, Gragoudas ES. Treatment of metastatic tumors of the choroid with proton beam irradiation. Ophthalmology. 2005;112:337–343. [PubMed]
  • Virdi PS, Hayreh SS. Ocular neovascularization with retinal vascular occlusion I. Association with experimental retinal vein occlusion. Arch Ophthalmol. 1982;100:331–341. [PubMed]
  • Yalvac IS, Eksioglu U, Satana B, Duman S. Long-term results of Ahmed glaucoma valve and Molteno implant in neovascular glaucoma. Eye. 2007;21:65–70. [PubMed]
  • Yap-Veloso MI, Simmons RB, Echelman DA, Gonzales TK, Veira WJ, Simmons RJ. Intraocular pressure control after contact transscleral diode cyclophotocoagulation in eyes with intractable glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 1998;7:319–328. [PubMed]