Mar-Abr - Sociedade Brasileira de Oftalmologia

102Guedes V, Colombini G, Pakter HM, Albuquerque LS, Valente RS, Alves RV, Brazuna R, Mitraud RS, Neurauter R3. Kerrigan – Baumrind LA, Quigley HA, Pease ME, KerriganDF, Mitchell RS. Number of ganglion cells in glaucoma eyescompared with threshold visual field tests in the same persons.Invest Ophtthalmol Vis Sci. 2000; 41(3): 471-8.4. Weinreb RN. Toward understanding the optic neuropathy ofglaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998; 116(8): 1102-3.5. Cantor LB, WuDunn D, Cortes A, Hoop J, Knotts S. Ocularhypotensive efficacy of bimatoprost 0,03% and travoprost0,004% in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension.Surv Ophthalmol. 2004; 49 Suppl 1: S12-8.6. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 7. Therelationship between control of intraocular pressure and visualfield deterioration. The AGIS Investigators. Am JOphthalmol 2000; 130(4): 429-40.7. Parrish R, Palmberg P, Sheu WP; XLT Study Group. Acomparison of latanoprost, bimatoprost, and travoprost inpatients with elevated intraocular pressure: a 12-week,randomized, masked-elevaluation multicenter study. Am JOphthalmol.2003; 135(5): 688-703.8. Netland PA, Landry T, Sullivan EK, Andrew R, Silver L, WeinerA, Mallick S, Dickerson J, Bergamini MV, Robertson SM, DavisAA, Travoprost Study Group. Travoprost compared withlatanoprost and timolol in patients with open-angle glaucomaor ocular hypertension. Am J Ophthalmol. 2001; 132(4): 472-84.9. Figueiredo CR, Susuki Junior ER, Ribeiro BB, Figueiredo BP,Batista WD, Agostini Netto J. Efeito do Bimatoprost,Latanoprost, Travoprost e Unoprostona na pressão intra-oculare no fluxo sangüíneo ocular. Rev Bras Oftalmol. 2002;61(12): 863-9.ENDEREÇO PARA CORRESPONDÊNCIAViviane GuedesEye CenterAv. das Américas, 500 / Bl. 03 salas 222 e 223(Downtown) – Barra da Tijuca - Rio de Janeiro (RJ) -Brasil - CEP: 22640-102Rev Bras Oftalmol. 2005; 64 (2): 97-102