Progressive Optic Neuropathy in Congenital Glaucoma Associated with the Sirsasana Yoga Posture

William and Anna Goldberg Glaucoma Service and Research Center, Wills Eye Institute, Jefferson Medical College, 840 Walnut Street, Suite 1150, PA 19107, USA.
Ophthalmic Surgery Lasers and Imaging (Impact Factor: 1.32). 07/2008; 39(4):339-40. DOI: 10.3928/15428877-20080701-03
Source: PubMed


The authors describe a case of progressive optic neuropathy in a patient with congenital glaucoma who had routinely practiced the Sirsasana (headstand) yoga posture for several years. Ophthalmic examination included best-corrected visual acuity, anterior segment examination, indirect ophthalmoscopy, ultrasound pachymetry for central corneal thickness, and intraocular pressure before, during, and after maintaining the Sirsasana posture for 5 minutes. Intraocular pressure increased significantly during the Sirsasana posture. Transient elevation in intraocular pressure during yoga exercises may lead to progressive glaucomatous optic neuropathy, especially in susceptible patients with congenital glaucoma.

Download full-text


Available from: Daniela Sanchez Monteiro de Barros, Feb 06, 2015
50 Reads
  • Source
    • "One case did not reach any recovery [53] and 1 case died [33]. In the remaining cases, clinical outcomes were not reported [28], [32], [35], [42], [46], [47], [60], [61]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: While yoga is gaining increased popularity in North America and Europe, its safety has been questioned in the lay press. The aim of this systematic review was to assess published case reports and case series on adverse events associated with yoga. Medline/Pubmed, Scopus, CAMBase, IndMed and the Cases Database were screened through February 2013; and 35 case reports and 2 case series reporting a total of 76 cases were included. Ten cases had medical preconditions, mainly glaucoma and osteopenia. Pranayama, hatha yoga, and Bikram yoga were the most common yoga practices; headstand, shoulder stand, lotus position, and forceful breathing were the most common yoga postures and breathing techniques cited. Twenty-seven adverse events (35.5%) affected the musculoskeletal system; 14 (18.4%) the nervous system; and 9 (11.8%) the eyes. Fifteen cases (19.7%) reached full recovery; 9 cases (11.3%) partial recovery; 1 case (1.3%) no recovery; and 1 case (1.3%) died. As any other physical or mental practice, yoga should be practiced carefully under the guidance of a qualified instructor. Beginners should avoid extreme practices such as headstand, lotus position and forceful breathing. Individuals with medical preconditions should work with their physician and yoga teacher to appropriately adapt postures; patients with glaucoma should avoid inversions and patients with compromised bone should avoid forceful yoga practices.
    PLoS ONE 10/2013; 8(10):e75515. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0075515 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although glaucoma is a multifactorial disease, elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) remains the most important known risk factor. Different systemic and local factors are thought to influence an individual's IOP. There can be a clinically significant rise in IOP when going from upright to horizontal or inverted body positions. Although there is a significant interindividual variability, the magnitude of the IOP change is greater in glaucomatous eyes. As patients usually spend a significant portion of their lives in the horizontal position, mainly during sleep, this is highly relevant. In this review we discuss the relationship between postural changes and IOP fluctuation, including changes in both body and head position. The possible mechanisms involved and the main implications for glaucomatous eyes are discussed. Finally, considerations with regard to sleep position in glaucoma patients are made based on evidence in the literature.
    Survey of Ophthalmology 09/2010; 55(5):445-53. DOI:10.1016/j.survophthal.2009.12.002 · 3.85 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To test feasibility of yoga within a high school curriculum and evaluate preventive efficacy for psychosocial well-being. Grade 11 or 12 students (N = 51) who registered for physical education (PE) were cluster-randomized by class 2:1 yoga:PE-as-usual. A Kripalu-based yoga program of physical postures, breathing exercises, relaxation, and meditation was taught 2 to 3 times a week for 10 weeks. Self-report questionnaires were administered to students 1 week before and after. Primary outcome measures of psychosocial well-being were Profile of Mood States-Short Form and Positive and Negative Affect Schedule for Children. Additional measures of psychosocial well-being included Perceived Stress Scale and Inventory of Positive Psychological Attitudes. Secondary measures of self-regulatory skills included Resilience Scale, State Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2™, and Child Acceptance Mindfulness Measure. To assess feasibility, yoga students completed a program evaluation. Analyses of covariance were conducted between groups with baseline as the covariate. Although PE-as-usual students showed decreases in primary outcomes, yoga students maintained or improved. Total mood disturbance improved in yoga students and worsened in controls (p = .015), as did Profile of Mood States-Short Form (POMS-SF) Tension-Anxiety subscale (p = .002). Although positive affect remained unchanged in both, negative affect significantly worsened in controls while improving in yoga students (p = .006). Secondary outcomes were not significant. Students rated yoga fairly high, despite moderate attendance. Implementation was feasible and students generally found it beneficial. Although not causal due to small, uneven sample size, this preliminary study suggests preventive benefits in psychosocial well-being from Kripalu yoga during high school PE. These results are consistent with previously published studies of yoga in school settings.
    Journal of developmental and behavioral pediatrics: JDBP 02/2012; 33(3):193-201. DOI:10.1097/DBP.0b013e31824afdc4 · 2.13 Impact Factor
Show more