Original Article Peak Intraocular Pressure Time during Water Drinking Test and Its Relationship with Glaucoma Severity Carolina Nicolela Susanna1, MD; Bianca Nicolela Susanna1, MD; Fernanda Nicolela Susanna2, MS Remo Susanna Jr2, MD, PhD; Carlos Gustavo De Moraes3, MD, PhD 1Department of Ophthalmology, ABC Foundation School of Medicine, Santo André, Brazil 2Department of Ophthalmology, University of Sao Paulo School of Medicine, Sao Paulo, Brazil 3Department of Ophthalmology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, United States ORCID: Carolina Nicolela Susanna: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1341-6112 Remo Susanna Jr: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9147-9528 Abstract Purpose: To investigate the association between the time of occurrence of intraocular pressure (IOP) peaks during the water-drinking test (WDT) and visual field damage in a cohort of primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) patients. Methods: In this retrospective, cross-sectional study, 98 eyes from 49 consecutive POAG patients were followed in a referral clinical practice. The relationship between the time when IOP peaks occurred during the WDT and the visual field mean deviation (MD) assessed with 24-2 visual field was tested with mixed-effects models. Results: MD value was significantly associated with the time of IOP peak occurrence (P = 0.020) when adjusting for the number of medications, but not with the IOP peak values (P = 0.238). Conclusion: The time of IOP peaks occurrence during the WDT was associated with glaucoma severity among treated POAG patients. Keywords: Glaucoma Severity; IOP Peak Time; Primary Open-angle Glaucoma; Water Drinking Test J Ophthalmic Vis Res 2022; 17 (1): 27–32 INTRODUCTION Provocative tests have been widely employed in medicine to assess changes in physiological Correspondence to: Remo Susanna Jr. MD, PhD. Department of Ophthalmology, University of Sao Paulo School of Medicine, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455, Sao Paulo, 01246-903, Brazil. E-mail: rsusannajr@gmail.com Received 07-04-2021; Accepted 01-08-2021 Access this article online Website: https://knepublishing.com/index.php/JOVR DOI: 10.18502/jovr.v17i1.10167 systems when stressed under strenuous conditions. For instance, coronary ischemia, not usually noted in physiologic conditions, may become evident when the subject undergoes a treadmill provocative test or following intravenous pharmacological stimulation. Depending on the magnitude of the change, treatment may be required to prevent long-term complications. This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. How to cite this article: Susanna CN, Susanna BN, Susanna R, De Moraes CG. Peak Intraocular Pressure Time during Water Drinking Test and Its Relationship with Glaucoma Severity. J Ophthalmic Vis Res 2022;17:27–32. © 2022 Susanna et al. THIS IS AN OPEN ACCESS ARTICLE DISTRIBUTED UNDER THE CREATIVE COMMONS ATTRIBUTION LICENSE | PUBLISHED BY KNOWLEDGE E 27 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.18502/jovr.v17i1.10167&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2019-07-17 https://knepublishing.com/index.php/JOVR Peak IOP Time in WDT; Susanna et al Similarly, the water-drinking test (WDT) is a stress test used to assess intraocular pressure (IOP) behavior and indirectly evaluate the outflow facility of the eye.[1] Glaucoma progression in patients whose IOP is apparently well-controlled during clinic visits maintain a challenge. A satisfactory correlation between clinic-based IOP measurements and mean circadian IOP have been shown, even though not predictive of the peak IOP.[2] In fact, more than 70% of IOP peaks occur at night or in the early morning hours.[3–6] However, monitoring IOP 24 hr is not practical in routine glaucoma practice. Diurnal tension curves (DTC) misses IOP peaks occurring overnight.[7] The WDT is a reliable and feasible means to estimate peak IOP. While many glaucomatous eyes may have seemingly controlled IOP during office hours or usual steady-state conditions, IOP peaks triggered by this test may reveal pressure measurements inconsistent with controlled disease and which could yield to disease progression in the long run. In fact, the peak IOP elicited during the WDT has been shown to correlate with the IOP peak that occurs during the day[8–12] and is highly reproducible.[9, 13, 14] More importantly, it has been shown to be associated with the risk of visual field (VF) progression of glaucoma and disease severity.[15–18] Recently, it has also been suggested that the WDT could be used to evaluate retinal ganglion cell function and hence have potential application for risk assessment.[18] In addition, the WDT is an indicator of treatment efficacy, assessing the effect of hypotensive drugs as well as surgeries.[9, 19–22] The mechanism of IOP elevation remains unclear, but there are some postulates, such as limited outflow facility, increased episcleral venous pressure (EVP), increased IOP mediated by the autonomic nervous system, and choroidal expansion.[23–25] Eyes with lower outflow facility should experience higher IOP peaks after ingestion of water than eyes with normal outflow function, thus being a surrogate measure of the outflow system of the eye and its ability to respond to transient IOP elevation.[26] The time interval in which peak IOP occurs after the ingestion of water can also be related to the ability of the drainage system to maintain IOP homeostasis. Eyes with worse outflow facility may experience continued IOP rise during the WDT, and as so, later IOP peaks than eyes with better outflow facility. This study aims to investigate the association between severity of glaucomatous VF loss, the magnitude, and the time of IOP peaks during the WDT in a group of treated primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) patients. METHODS This retrospective, cross-sectional study included 98 eyes from 49 consecutive POAG patients followed in a referral glaucoma center. The study protocol adhered to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki[27] and was approved by the committee of ethics. Informed consent for the research was obtained from all the patients. Consecutive patients that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected for the present study. A review of medical history, IOP measurement with Goldmann applanation tonometry, best-corrected visual acuity, and slit-lamp biomicroscopy was performed in these patients. Patients were included if they had a glaucomatous appearing optic disc during disc photograph evaluation defined by a senior glaucoma specialist associated with glaucomatous VF loss on 24- 2 standard automated perimetry. VF loss was defined according to the modified Anderson’s criteria. These results were confirmed on at least two consecutive examinations. Included eyes had a best-corrected visual acuity of at least 20/40, spherical refraction better than ±5.00 diopters, and cylinder correction within 3.00 diopters. We excluded participants with non- glaucomatous optic neuropathy, closed or narrow angle assessed by gonioscopic examination, retinal disease, secondary glaucoma, or any other abnormality that could interfere with VF testing. None of the patients had undergone trabeculectomy or laser trabeculoplasty and none had cataract surgery within the last six months before enrollment. The water-drinking test (WDT) consists of one baseline IOP measurement, followed by ingestion of 800 mL of water in 5 min and three more IOP measurements taken at 15-min intervals.[28] All participants were required to stop liquid ingestion 2 hr before the test. Intraocular pressure measurements were performed with a Goldmann applanation tonometer (Haag-Streit, GmbH, Switzerland). The maximum value of the three measurements was considered as the IOP 28 JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMIC AND VISION RESEARCH Volume 17, Issue 1, January-March 2021 Peak IOP Time in WDT; Susanna et al Table 1. Baseline characteristics Variables Data Number of eyes 98 Age 60 ±12 (range: 33–95) Race Caucasian Asian 88% 12% Sex Female Male 54% 46% Number of medications of 2 ± 1 (range: 0–5) Latanoprost use 76 (77.5%) Mean baseline MD –8.23 ± 7.94 dB (range: –31.19 to 2.38 dB) Mean baseline IOP 14 ± 3 mmHg (range: 8 to 22 mmHg) Mean peak IOP 18 ± 4 mmHg (range: 10 to 30 mmHg) ∗Presented mean ± standard deviation, calculated using summary statistics. MD, mean deviation; IOP, intraocular pressure Table 2. Distribution of number of eyes, mean MD, and mean IOP peak value of eyes according to the time of IOP peak in the WDT Time of IOP peak Number of eyes MD value (dB)† IOP peak (mmHg)† 15 20 (20.4%) –4.36 ± 5.51 17 ± 4 30 42 (42.9%) –9.35 ± 7.98 19 ± 3 45 36 (36.7%) –9.13 ± 8.56 19 ± 5 †Presented as mean ± standard deviation, calculated using summary statistics. MD, mean deviation; IOP, intraocular pressure; WDT, water-drinking test. peak during the WDT.[9] The time of the peak was defined as the time when the maximum IOP was measured. To minimize the effect of the IOP circadian rhythm, all WDT were performed between 4:00 PM and 5:00 PM. Standard achromatic perimetry was performed with the Humphrey VF Analyzer (24-2 SITA- Standard; Carl Zeiss Meditec Inc., Dublin, CA). All patients underwent VF testing and reliable exams (<20% fixation losses, <33% false-positive and false-negative rates) were analyzed. Visual field tests and WDT were performed up to four months apart. Statistical Analyses Statistical comparisons were performed between patients with mixed-effects models, which considers the correlation between both eyes of the same patient. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata Version 14 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX). Statistical significance was reached at P < 5%. RESULTS Ninety-eight eyes from 49 POAG patients were analyzed. The mean age of patients was 60 ± 12 years (range, 33–95) and 54% were women. Patients were on a mean of 2 ± 1 (range, 0–5) IOP lowering medications. The mean of mean deviation values (MD) was –8.23 ± 7.94 dB (range, –31.19 to 2.38 dB). Baseline characteristics are described in Table 1. Table 2 depicts the distribution of the number of eyes, mean MD values (dB), and mean IOP peak according to the time point of the WDT in which the IOP peak occurred. The mean IOP peak and the mean MD values (17 ± 4 mmHg and 4.36 ± 5.51 dB, respectively) were lower at 15 min compared to 30 min (19 ± 3 mmHg and –9.35 ± 7.98 dB) and 45 min (19 ± 5 mmHg and –9.13 ± 8.56 dB) in the WDT. The box plot of the distribution of MD value in each time IOP peak occurrence (Figure 1) shows lower MD values in the later time points (30 and 45 min) compared to 15 min. JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMIC AND VISION RESEARCH Volume 17, Issue 1, January-March 2021 29 Peak IOP Time in WDT; Susanna et al Table 3. Results of the mixed model evaluating the association between the MD and time of IOP peak, IOP peak value, and number of medications. Parameter Coefficient 95% CI P-value Time of IOP peak –0.155 –0.284 to –0.025 0.020 Peak value – 0.237 –0.630 to 0.156 0.238 Number of medications –1.137 –2.899 to 0.625 0.206 Constant 3.859 –4.691 to 12.411 0.376 †Calculated using mixed effect model. CI, confidence interval Figure 1. Distribution of mean deviation value at each time point of the WDT. †Boxplot depicting the MD distribution. MD, mean deviation; IOP, intraocular pressure; WDT, water-drinking test; min, minutes. Separate multivariable models showed a statistically significant relationship between the time of IOP peak and MD values (P = 0.010) adjusting for number of medications. However, peak value was not associated with MD values when adjusting for number of medications (P = 0.117). The results of the mixed-effect model relating MD values to the time of IOP peak, IOP peak value, and number of medications together are presented in Table 3. Eyes with more damage in VFs had later IOP peaks during WDT (P = 0.020). Neither number of medications nor IOP peak value were significantly related to MD values (P = 0.238 and P = 0.206, respectively). DISCUSSION Intraocular pressure peak is a key risk factor for glaucoma progression.[29–31] To better investigate other parameters obtained from the WDT, we tested whether the IOP peak time was related to the level of glaucomatous functional damage, which might reflect the eye’s outflow system status of a given eye. Therefore, it is expected that in eyes with worse outflow facility, IOP elevation may remain rising for longer time, leading to later IOP peaks during the WDT. Razeghinejad et al[32] investigated the effect of WDT after tube shunt surgery and trabeculectomy and showed that 30 min after the WDT, IOP in the trabeculectomy group initiated to decline, whereas for the tube shunt group it remained increasing 30 JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMIC AND VISION RESEARCH Volume 17, Issue 1, January-March 2021 Peak IOP Time in WDT; Susanna et al up to 60 min, which might have implications on tubes’ efficacy in advanced glaucoma patients. Additionally, Waisbourd et al[22] investigated the effect of the WDT on the IOP of patients with angle-closure glaucoma and demonstrated that after peripheral iridotomy was performed, patients had a more pronounced IOP recovery, probably due to an increased trabecular meshwork area exposure following treatment. This corroborates the reasoning that eyes with impaired outflow have different time responses during the WDT. We found that the time during WDT of IOP peaks’ occurrence was associated with glaucoma severity in a population with treated POAG. Specifically, eyes with more severe disease had a later IOP peak than eyes with less severe disease (P = 0.020). In other words, eyes with later IOP peaks experienced continued IOP rise during the WDT until the maximum IOP was reached (IOP peak) and as so, a longer period of IOP elevation than eyes with earlier IOP peaks, possibly reflecting a better ability of these eyes to handle transient IOP elevation. Accordantly, De Moraes et al[33] showed that the number of long peaks assessed with contact lens sensor (CLS) was the best predictors of faster progression in treated glaucoma patients.[33] In contrast with results found by other authors,[15–17] there was no association between peak IOP value and MD (P = 0.238) in our study. Probably because patients were under treatment based on physician’s discretion, which was adjusted to reduce IOP peaks elicited by the WDT. Therefore, patients showing more advanced glaucoma were likely prone to receive aggressive therapy in both eyes to achieve lower target IOP peaks. One limitation is that this was a retrospective study. In order to reduce selection bias, we consecutively selected patients from a cohort in which all patients had routinely been submitted to the WDT. Further prospective studies evaluating these WDT parameters, preferably with patients free of topical treatment, should be done to better understand the relationship between the peak time and VF defect. In conclusion, this study demonstrated that the time of occurrence of IOP peak measured with the WDT was associated with glaucoma severity and might be an additional tool to evaluate glaucomatous patients. Financial Support and Sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of Interest There are no conflicts of interest. REFERENCES 1. Kronfeld C. Water drinking and outflow facility. Invest Ophthalmol 1975;14:49–52. 2. Nakakura S, Nomura Y, Ataka S, Shiraki K. Relation between office intraocular pressure and 24-hour intraocular pressure in patients with primary open- angle glaucoma treated with a combination of topical antiglaucoma eye drops. J Glaucoma 2007;16:201–204. 3. Barkana Y, Anis S, Liebmann J, Tello C, Ritch R. Clinical utility of intraocular pressure monitoring outside of normal office hours in patients with glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:793–797. 4. Liu JHK, Zhang X, Kripke DF, Weinreb RN. Twenty- four-hour intraocular pressure pattern associated with early glaucomatous changes. Invest Opthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:1586. 5. Liu JHK, Kripke DF, Hoffman RE, Twa MD, Loving RT, Rex KM, et al. Nocturnal elevation of intraocular pressure in young adults. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1998;39:2707– 2712. 6. Liu JHK, Kripke DF, Twa MD, Hoffman RE, Mansberger SL, Rex KM, et al. Twenty-four-hour pattern of intraocular pressure in the aging population. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999;40:2912–2917. 7. Goldberg I, Clement CI. The water drinking test. Am J Ophthalmol 2010;150:447–449. 8. Kumar RS, De Guzman MHP, Ong PY, Goldberg I. Does peak intraocular pressure measured by water drinking test reflect peak circadian levels? A pilot study. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2008;36:312–315. 9. Susanna R, Clement C, Goldberg I, Hatanaka M. Applications of the water drinking test in glaucoma management. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2017;45:625–631. 10. Olatunji O, Olawoye O, Ajayi BGK. Correlation and agreement between water drinking test and modified diurnal tension curve in untreated glaucoma patients in Nigeria. J Glaucoma 2020;29:498–503. 11. V De Moraes CG, Furlanetto RL, Reis ASC, Vegini F, Cavalcanti NF, Susanna R Jr. Agreement between stress intraocular pressure and long-term intraocular pressure measurements in primary open-angle glaucoma. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2009;37:270–274. 12. Vasconcelos-Moraes CG, Susanna R. Correlation between the water drinking test and modified diurnal tension curve in untreated glaucomatous eyes. Clinics 2008;63:433– 436. 13. Hatanaka M, Alencar LM, De Moraes CG, Susanna R. Reproducibility of intraocular pressure peak and fluctuation of the water-drinking test. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2013;41:355–359. JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMIC AND VISION RESEARCH Volume 17, Issue 1, January-March 2021 31 Peak IOP Time in WDT; Susanna et al 14. Babic M, De Moraes CG, Hatanaka M, Ju G, Susanna R. Reproducibility of the water drinking test in treated glaucomatous patients. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2015;43:228–233. 15. Susanna R, Hatanaka M, Vessani RM, Pinheiro A, Morita C. Correlation of asymmetric glaucomatous visual field damage and water-drinking test response. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:641–644. 16. De Moraes CG, Susanna R, Sakata LM, Hatanaka M. Predictive value of the water drinking test and the risk of glaucomatous visual field progression. J Glaucoma 2017;26:767–773. 17. Susanna R, Vessani RM, Sakata L, Zacarias LC, Hatanaka M. The relation between intraocular pressure peak in the water drinking test and visual field progression in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 2005;89:1298–1301. 18. Gameiro G, Monsalve P, Golubev I, Ventura L, Porciatti V. Neurovascular changes associated with the water drinking test. J Glaucoma 2018;27:429–432. 19. Kerr NM, Lew HR, Skalicky SE. Selective laser trabeculoplasty reduces intraocular pressure peak in response to the water drinking test. J Glaucoma 2016;25:727–731. 20. Martinez P, Trubnik V, Leiby BE, Hegarty SE, Razeghinejad R, Savant S, et al. A comparative study of the water drinking test in eyes with open-angle glaucoma and prior trabeculectomy or tube shunt. J Glaucoma 2017;26:119– 125. 21. Germano RAS, Susanna R, De Moraes CG, Susanna BN, Susanna CN, Chibana MN. Effect of switching from latanoprost to bimatoprost in primary open-angle glaucoma patients who experienced intraocular pressure elevation during treatment. J Glaucoma 2016;25:e359– e366. 22. Waisbourd M, Savant SV, Sun Y, Martinez P, Myers JS. Water-drinking test in primary angle-closure suspect before and after laser peripheral iridotomy. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2016;44:89–94. 23. Spaeth GL, Vacharat N. Provocative tests and chronic simple glaucoma. I. Effect of atropine on the water- drinking test: intimations of central regulatory control. II. Fluorescein angiography provocative test: a new approach to separation of the normal from the pathological. Br J Ophthalmol 1972;56:205–216. 24. Diestelhorst M, Krieglstein GK. The effect of the water-drinking test on aqueous humor dynamics in healthy volunteers. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1994;232:145–147. 25. De Moraes CGV, Reis ASC, Cavalcante AF de S, Sano ME, Susanna R. Choroidal expansion during the water drinking test. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2009;247:385– 389. 26. Bhartiya S, Ichhpujani P. Water drinking test: the second innings scorecard. Clin Exp Vis Eye Res 2020;3:1–3. 27. World Medical Association. World Medical Association declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 2013;310:2191– 2194. 28. Susanna CN, Susanna R, Hatanaka M, Susanna BN, Susanna FN, De Moraes CG. Comparison of intraocular pressure changes during the water drinking test between different fluid volumes in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2018;27:950–956. 29. Konstas AGP, Quaranta L, Mikropoulos DG, Nasr MB, Russo A, Jaffee HA, et al. Peak intraocular pressure and glaucomatous progression in primary open-angle glaucoma. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2012;28:26–32. 30. De Moraes CG, Liebmann JM, Greenfield DS, Gardiner SK, Ritch R, Krupin T. Risk factors for visual field progression in the low-pressure glaucoma treatment study. Am J Ophthalmol 2012;154:702–711. 31. V De Moraes CG, Juthani VJ, Liebmann JM, Teng CC, Tello C, Susanna R Jr, et al. Risk factors for visual field progression in treated glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2011;129:562–568. 32. Razeghinejad M, Tajbakhsh Z, Nowroozzadeh M, Masoumpour M. Water drinking test: intraocular pressure changes after tube surgery and trabeculectomy. J Ophthalmic Vis Res 2017;12:390. 33. De Moraes CG, Jasien JV, Simon-Zoula S, Liebmann JM, Ritch R. Visual field change and 24-hour IOP-related profile with a contact lens sensor in treated glaucoma patients. Ophthalmology 2016;123:744–753. 32 JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMIC AND VISION RESEARCH Volume 17, Issue 1, January-March 2021