. 2013 Jan;8(1):17–24.

Table 5.

Studies reporting ocular biometrics in angle closure

Authors	Groups;numbers	Definitions	Mean age(standard deviation)	CCT (µ)	Lensthickness (mm)	Anteriorchamber depth (mm)	Axiallength	Lens/axiallength factor
He et al⁷	PACS; 72	270 degrees of posterior pigmented TM not visible	NP	NP	4.7	2.05	22.5	NP
Sihota et al⁸	PACS; 19	> 180 of posterior pigmented TM non visible	37.19(10.5)	560.98	4	3.06	23.21	NP
Sihota et al⁸	ACG; 34	> 180 of posterior pigmented TM non visible	49.3 (14.4)	542.51	4.04	2.87	22.58	NP
Ramani et al⁹	PACS; 57	>180degrees of posterior pigmented TM not visible	52.4 (10.3)	480	4.27	2.24	22.23	2.1
Lan et al⁴	AACG; 33		65.9 (8.5)	NP	5.1	2.25	22.39	2.22
Lan et al⁴	CACG; 41		63.9 (9.3)	NP	4.84	2.69	23.13	2.23
Lim et al¹⁰	AACG;73		61 (10.9)	NP	5.01	2.11	21.86	2.1
George et al³	Occludableangle; 143	< 180degrees of posterior pigmented TM not visible	4.43 (9.23)	NP	4.4	2.53	22.07	1.99
George et al³	ACG; 22	Occludableangle + IOP> 22 mmHg	57.45 (8.5)	NP	4.23	2.63	21.92	1.91
Ramani et al¹¹	PACS; 82	>180degrees of posterior pigmented TM not visible	52.1 (10)	480	4.23	2.43	22.1	2.1
Salmon et al⁵	CACG; 46		63.26	NP	4.73	2.24	22.43	2.11

CCT, central corneal thickness; NP, not provided; mm, millimeters; PACS, primary angle closure suspect; ACG, angle closure glaucoma; AACG, acute angle closure glaucoma; CACG, chronic angle closure glaucoma; TM, trabecular meshwork