Full Text Article

Research Article  ·  Volume 7, Issue 2 (2026)  ·  ISSN: 2766-2276  ·  Open Access  ·  CC BY 4.0  ·  ~7 min read

Open Access Research Article Vol.7, Issue 2 18 February 2026

Serum Parameters of Primary Open Angle Glaucoma Patients in a Tertiary Hospital - A Pilot Study

Authors
Ayanniyi AA*, Rauf RI, Tor AA, Jideofor CM, Abaya GJ and Alao OG*
Corresponding author: Ayanniyi AA*, Rauf RI, Tor AA, Jideofor CM, Abaya GJ and Alao OG
Received
05 December 2025
Accepted
16 February 2026
Published
18 February 2026
Copyright
© 2026 Ayanniyi AA. Distributed under Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0
DOI: 10.37871/jbres2270 CC-BY 4.0 Vol.7(2): 1–12 ISSN 2766-2276
Abstract

Objective: To evaluate serum parameters in treatment-naive and treated Primary Open Angle Glaucoma (POAG), and no glaucoma eye patients.

Methods: Fasting blood samples of the participants were analyzed for electrolytes, proteins, urea, Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN), creatinine, lipids, and liver enzymes.

Results: Electrolytes, including sodium, potassium, chloride, and total carbon dioxide showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). Total protein was slightly higher in treated POAG patients (7.8 ± 0.4 g/dL; p = 0.048), with elevated gamma-globulin (1.7 ± 0.2 g/dL). Urea and BUN were significantly increased in treated POAG (p = 0.011 and 0.014), while creatinine was no significantly elevated. Triglycerides were significantly higher in treated POAG (1.5 ± 0.7 mmol/L, p < 0.001); cholesterol, HDL, and LDL showed no differences. Liver enzymes were similar, though ALT was highest in treated POAG but remained within normal range.

Conclusion: These results indicate minor elevations in serum proteins, urea, BUN, and triglycerides in treated POAG patients, potentially reflecting metabolic effects of treatment. Most other parameters were comparable across groups. Findings suggest serum urea, total protein, and globulin hold promise in translational study for POAG, but larger studies are needed to confirm clinical relevance and their specificity for POAG diagnosis.

Introduction

Unmanaged glaucoma remains a cause of irreversible blindness [1]. Primary Open Angle Glaucoma (POAG) is a common type of glaucoma [2] with very difficult indices including relentlessness, progressiveness, painlessness and visual loss. These features have grave implications for individuals living with POAG, their families and the public as visual impairment or blindness is abruptly discovered when not much help to preserve vision can be rendered [3,4]. Notably, early detection and appropriate management remain a cornerstone in preventing glaucoma blindness. There are efforts towards changing this POAG blinding narrative and its burdensome implications [3]. Some serum parameters may have translational potential in effective management of POAG.

This pilot study is necessarily a continuation of work that investigated urine and blood parameters of Individuals with Glaucoma (IWG) and its translational potential for managing POAG [5-8]. The initial study compared urine [6], serum [7], and hematological [8] parameters among individuals with POAG with those without glaucoma. It is hypothesized that ant glaucoma medication might have caused dehydration among others in individuals using them leading to differential in body fluid values between the two groups.

Methods

This study took place at two sites including a tertiary hospital and a private laboratory. The hospital has many medical specialties including ophthalmology. The department of ophthalmology provides medical, surgical and optical care for eye patients. Between 600 and 900 patients are present with different eye conditions at the hospital every month. Some of the eye condition include cataract, glaucoma, refractive error, presbyopia and conjunctivitis. The department has a complement of 7 ophthalmologists, 14 trainee ophthalmologists, 24 nurses, 5 optometrists, and 4 opticians among other supporting personnel. The private medical laboratory has capacity to process all the serum parameters investigated in this study.

The participants in this study were recruited from the eye clinics. They were in two main groups: those with and without primary open angle glaucoma. The participants with glaucoma were either on antiglaucoma drugs or not (newly diagnosed - antiglaucoma drug naive). Each of the participants underwent routine clerkship, examinations, investigations and diagnosis in the eye clinic. The diagnosis of POAG was based on gonioscopic open anterior chamber angle, intraocular pressure of at least 20 mmHg, and Cup Disc (CD) ratio of > 0.5 and with or without any of family history of glaucoma, constricted visual field and optical coherence retinal nerve fibre layer thinning. Each participant was assigned a number and requested to present at the designated private laboratory before 10am after an overnight fasting for drawing of 10 milliliters of venous blood by the phlebotomist. The laboratory was blinded from the grouping of the participants. Any participant who failed to present at the laboratory was followed up on the phone. Meanwhile, any participant who expressed reservations including distant living address, tight work schedule, uncooperative in presenting at the laboratory for submission of blood sample was excluded from the study. The serum parameters investigated were sodium, potassium, chloride, protein total, albumin, alpha-1-globulin, alpha-2-globulin, beta-1-globulin, beta-2-globulin, gamma-globulin, total Carbon Dioxide (tCO2), urea, creatinine, Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN), creatinine, triglycerides, total cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein (HDL).

This study was approved by the Institution Review Board. Further, information on this study was explained to each of the participants and written informed consent was obtained. The study was conducted following the tenets of declaration of Helsinki on research conduct in human participants.

3. The data was collated, entered, cleaned and analyzed including simple proportion, percentage, mean and ANOVA statistics. The p value was taken at p < 0.05. Results

Sociodemographic characteristics

The fasting serum of 38 participants including newly diagnosed POAG (4), normal (21), and POAG on treatment (13) mean age 44.0SD14.2 (Range 19-74) years were investigated. There were 20 (52.6%) male and 18 (47.4%) female. Their educational status includes non-formal 2 (5.3%), Quranic 1 (2.6%), primary 2 (5.3%), secondary 6 (15.8%), and tertiary 27 (71.0%). Their occupation includes skilled 27 (71.0%), semi-Skilled 6 (15.8), and unskilled 5 (13.2%). Marital status includes single 9 (23.7%), married 26 (68.4%), divorce 1 (2.6%) and widow 2 (5.3%). Their religion was Christianity 29 (76.3%) and Islam 9 (23.7%). Their ethnicity includes Yoruba 9 (23.7%), Igbo 8 (21.1%), Hausa 2 (5.3%) and others 19 (50.0%). Five (13.2%) participants had relatives with a history of glaucoma and 33 (86.8%) had no family history of glaucoma. Thirty (78.9%) had no comorbidities, but 7 (18.4) had hypertension and 1 (2.6%) diabetes mellitus.

Serum electrolytes of the participants

The mean values for serum electrolytes for the three groups of participants are displayed in table 1. Sodium: Newly diagnosed POAG 139.0 + 1.8 mmol/L, normal participants 132.1 + 29.5 mmol/L and POAG on treatment 137.4 + 2.9 mmol/L, [F(2,35) = 0.31, p = 0.735)]. Potassium: Newly diagnosed POAG 4.3 + 0.4 mmol/L, normal participants 10.6 + 28.3 mmol/L and POAG on treatment 19.0 + 36.2 mmol/L, [F(2,35) = 0.494, p = 0.615]. Chloride, newly diagnosed POAG 106.0 + 2.5 mmol/L, normal participants 104.8 + 2.5 mmol/L and POAG on treatment 105.5 + 2.5 mmol/L, [F(2,35) = 0.714, p = 0.497]. Total carbon dioxide, newly diagnosed POAG 26.3+4.5mmol/L, normal participants 26.8+2.9 mmol/L and POAG on treatment 26.2 + 2.2 mmol/L, [F(2,35) = 0.237, p = 0.790].

Table 1. Analysis of serum electrolytes of the participants.
Serum Parameters (mmol/L) & ANOVA Group N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max
LB UB
Sodium F(2,35) = 0.31, p = 0.735 New POAG 4 139.0000 1.82574 0.91287 136.0948 141.9052 137.00 141.00
Normal 21 132.0967 29.46534 6.42986 118.6842 145.5091 4.03 146.00
POAG on Rx 13 137.3846 2.90225 0.80494 135.6308 139.1384 131.00 140.00
Total 38 134.6324 21.92432 3.55659 127.4260 141.8387 4.03 146.00
Potassium                         F(2,35) = 0.494,
p = 0.615
New POAG 4 4.2825 0.44079 0.22039 3.5811 4.9839 3.70 4.68
Normal 21 10.6229 28.27666 6.17047 -2.2485 23.4942 3.78 134.00
POAG on Rx 13 19.0254 36.16145 10.02938 -2.8268 40.8775 3.90 101.00
Total 38 12.8300 29.67267 4.81354 3.0768 22.5832 3.70 134.00
Chloride F(2,35) = 0.714,
p = 0.497
New POAG 4 106.0000 2.44949 1.22474 102.1023 109.8977 103.00 109.00
Normal 21 104.7857 2.45770 0.53631 103.6670 105.9044 100.00 111.00
POAG on Rx 13 105.4615 1.61325 0.44743 104.4867 106.4364 103.00 108.00
Total 38 105.1447 2.18703 0.35478 104.4259 105.8636 100.00 111.00
TCO2 F(2,35) = 0.237, p = 0.790 New POAG 4 26.2500 4.34933 2.17466 19.3292 33.1708 22.00 32.00
Normal 21 26.8095 2.89170 0.63102 25.4932 28.1258 22.00 35.00
POAG on Rx 13 26.1538 2.15430 0.59750 24.8520 27.4557 23.00 31.00
Total 38 26.5263 2.76793 0.44902 25.6165 27.4361 22.00 35.00

Serum protein of the participants

The mean values for serum protein for the three groups of participants are displayed in table 2. Protein, total: Newly diagnosed POAG 7.4 + 0.3 g/dL, normal participants 7.4 + 0.5 g/dL and POAG on treatment 7.8 + 0.4 g/dL, [F(2,35) = 3.308, p = 0.048]. Albumin: Newly diagnosed POAG 4.2 + 0.2 g/dL, normal participants 4.2 + 0.3 g/dL and POAG on treatment 4.3 + 0.3 g/dL, F(2,35) = 0.881, p = 0.423]. Alpha-1-Globulin: newly diagnosed POAG 0.3 + 0.0 g/dL, normal participants 0.3 + 0.0 g/dL and POAG on treatment 0.3 + 0.1 g/dL, [F(2,35) = 0.261, p = 0.771]. Alpha-2-Globulin: newly POAG 0.7 + 0.0 g/dL, normal participants 0.7 + 0.1 g/dL and POAG on treatment 0.7 + 0.2 g/dL, [F(2,35) = 0.180, p = 0.836]. Beta-1-Globulin: newly diagnosed POAG 0.4+0.1 g/dL, normal participants 0.4 + 0.1 g/dL and POAG on treatment 0.4 + 0.1 g/dL, [F(2,35) = 1.114, p = 0.339]. Beta-2-Globulin: Newly diagnosed POAG 0.3 + 0.1 g/dL, normal participants 0.4 + 0.1 g/dL and POAG on treatment 0.4 + 0.1 g/dL, [F(2,35) = 2.164, p =0.130]. Gamma-Globulin: newly diagnosed POAG 1.6 + 0.2 g/dL, normal participants 1.5 + 0.4 g/dL and POAG on treatment 1.7 + 0.2 g/dL, [F(2,35) = 1.673, p = 0.202].

Table 2. Analysis of serum protein of the participants.
Serum Parameters (g/dL) & ANOVA Group N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max
LB UB
Protein, total F(2,35) = 3.308,   
p = 0.048
New POAG 4 7.3500 0.26458 0.13229 6.9290 7.7710 7.10 7.70
Normal 21 7.3905 0.47001 0.10256 7.1765 7.6044 6.40 8.40
POAG on Rx 13 7.7615 0.39272 0.10892 7.5242 7.9989 7.30 8.70
Total 38 7.5132 0.45629 0.07402 7.3632 7.6631 6.40 8.70
Albumin F(2,35) = 0.881,     
p = 0.423
New POAG 4 4.1525 0.20123 0.10061 3.8323 4.4727 3.89 4.32
Normal 21 4.1786 0.31650 0.06907 4.0345 4.3226 3.66 4.73
POAG on Rx 13 4.3100 0.29510 0.08185 4.1317 4.4883 3.61 4.82
Total 38 4.2208 0.29998 0.04866 4.1222 4.3194 3.61 4.82
Alpha-1-Globulin F(2,35) = 0.261,    
p = 0.771
New POAG 4 0.2925 0.02363 0.01181 0.2549 0.3301 0.26 0.31
Normal 21 0.2938 0.04260 0.00930 0.2744 0.3132 0.24 0.40
POAG on Rx 13 0.2823 0.05434 0.01507 0.2495 0.3151 0.22 0.39
Total 38 0.2897 0.04487 0.00728 0.2750 0.3045 0.22 0.40
Alpha-2-Globulin F(2,35) = 0.180,     
p = 0.836
New POAG 4 0.6675 0.02872 0.01436 0.6218 0.7132 0.65 0.71
Normal 21 0.6595 0.10486 0.02288 0.6118 0.7073 0.50 0.93
POAG on Rx 13 0.6877 0.18254 0.05063 0.5774 0.7980 0.45 1.04
Total 38 0.6700 0.13034 0.02114 0.6272 0.7128 0.45 1.04
Beta-1-Globulin F(2,35) = 1.114,      p = 0.339 New POAG 4 0.3800 0.02944 0.01472 0.3332 0.4268 0.34 0.41
Normal 21 0.4138 0.05563 0.01214 0.3885 0.4391 0.28 0.52
POAG on Rx 13 0.4292 0.06714 0.01862 0.3887 0.4698 0.35 0.54
Total 38 3.308 0.05839 0.00947 0.3963 0.4347 0.28 0.54
Beta-2-Globulin F(2,35) = 2.164,      p = 0.130 New POAG 4 0.3025 0.06898 0.03449 0.1927 0.4123 0.23 0.39
Normal 21 0.3843 0.08109 0.01770 0.3474 0.4212 0.27 0.53
POAG on Rx 13 0.3900 0.07095 0.01968 0.3471 0.4329 0.29 0.50
Total 38 0.3776 0.07913 0.01284 0.3516 0.4036 0.23 0.53
Gamma-Globulin F(2,35) = 1.673,             p = 0.202 New POAG 4 1.5600 0.19253 0.09626 1.2536 1.8664 1.32 1.76
Normal 21 1.4605 0.36456 0.07955 1.2945 1.6264 0.94 2.66
POAG on Rx 13 1.6592 0.21792 0.06044 1.5275 1.7909 1.31 2.15
Total 38 1.5389 0.31444 0.05101 1.4356 1.6423 0.94 2.66

Serum urea, blood urea nitrogen and creatinine of the participants

The mean values for serum urea, blood urea nitrogen and creatinine for the three groups of participants are displayed in table 3. Urea: Newly POAG 2.7 + 0.9 mmol/L, normal participants 3.5 + 1.0 mmol/L and POAG on treatment 4.4 + 1.1 mmol/L, [F(2,35) = 5.118, p = 0.011]. Blood urea nitrogen: Newly diagnosed POAG 1.3 + 0.4 mmol/L, normal participants 1.7 + 0.5 mmol/L and POAG on treatment 2.0 + 0.5 mmol/L, [F(2,35) = 4.842, p = 0.014]. Creatinine: newly diagnosed POAG 73.5 13.6 µmol/L, normal participants 73.1 + 15.9 µmol/L and POAG on treatment 85.7 + 16.4 µmol/L, [F(2,35) = 2.642, p = 0.085].

Table 3. Analysis of serum urea, blood urea nitrogen and creatinine of the participants.
Serum Parameters & ANOVA Group N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max
LB UB
Urea (mmol/L) F(2,35) = 5.118, p = 0.011 New POAG 4 2.6750 0.88835 0.44418 1.2614 4.0886 2.10 4.00
Normal 21 3.5000 0.98995 0.21602 3.0494 3.9506 1.90 6.20
POAG on Rx 13 4.3462 1.07364 0.29777 3.6974 4.9949 2.30 6.40
Total 38 3.7026 1.11827 0.18141 3.3351 4.0702 1.90 6.40
BUN (mmol/L)                       F(2,35) = 4.842, p = 0.014 New POAG 4 1.2750 0.41932 0.20966 0.6078 1.9422 1.00 1.90
Normal 21 1.6524 0.46435 0.10133 1.4410 1.8637 0.90 2.90
POAG on Rx 13 2.0385 0.50421 0.13984 1.7338 2.3432 1.10 3.00
Total 38 1.7447 0.52179 0.08465 1.5732 1.9162 0.90 3.00

Creatinine (µmol/L)

F(2,35) = 2.642,

p = 0.085

New POAG

4

73.5000

13.57694

6.78847

51.8961

95.1039

58.00

91.00

Normal 21 73.1429 15.91944 3.47391 65.8964 80.3893 26.00 103.00
POAG on Rx 13 85.6923 16.38793 4.54519 75.7892 95.5954 53.00 112.00
Total 38 77.4737 16.58677 2.69073 72.0217 82.9256 26.00 112.00

Serum lipids of the participants

The mean values for serum lipids for the three groups of participants are displayed in table 4. Total Cholesterol: newly POAG 24.0 + 39.4 mmol/L, normal participants 39.3 + 51.7 mmol/L and POAG on treatment 9.5 + 13.7 mmol/L, [F(2,35) = 2.081, p = 0.140]. Cholesterol HDL: Newly diagnosed POAG 57.0 + 111.3 mmol/L, normal participants 63.0 + 83.7 mmol/L and POAG on treatment 45.9 + 73.8 mmol/L, [F(2,35) = 0.168, p = 0.846].  Cholesterol LDL: Newly diagnosed POAG 2.8+1.0 mmol/L, normal participants 14.8 + 38.0 mmol/L and POAG on treatment 43.4 + 62.6 mmol/L, [F(2,35) = 1.946, p = 0.158]. Triglyceride: Newly POAG 0.6 + 0.3 mmol/L, normal participants 0.8 + 0.4 mmol/L and POAG on treatment 1.5 + 0.7, [F(2,35) = 9.598, p = 0.000].

Table 4. Analysis of serum lipids of the participants.
Serum Parameters (mmol/L) & ANOVA Group N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max
LB UB
Total Cholesterol F(2,35) = 2.081,       p = 0.140 New POAG 4 23.9775 39.36753 19.68376 -38.6650 86.6200 2.82 83.00
Normal 21 39.3119 51.68733 11.27910 15.7841 62.8397 2.74 147.00
POAG on Rx 13 9.5354 13.70789 3.80189 1.2518 17.8190 3.02 55.00
Total 38 27.5111 42.71556 6.92938 13.4708 41.5513 2.74 147.00
Cholesterol HDL                     F(2,35) = 0.168,       p = 0.846 New POAG 4 57.0425 111.30528 55.65264 -120.0690 234.1540 1.04 224.00
Normal 21 62.9457 83.66249 18.25665 24.8630 101.0284 0.78 253.00
POAG on Rx 13 45.9146 73.75139 20.45496 1.3471 90.4821 1.16 252.00
Total 38 56.4979 81.33288 13.19394 29.7644 83.2313 0.78 253.00
Cholesterol LDL F(2,35) = 1.946, p = 0.158 New POAG 4 2.8375 0.96824 0.48412 1.2968 4.3782 1.64 3.85
Normal 21 14.7562 38.02950 8.29872 -2.5546 32.0670 1.60 141.00
POAG on Rx 13 43.3631 62.56283 17.35181 5.5567 81.1694 1.51 156.00
Total 38 23.2882 47.74300 7.74494 7.5954 38.9809 1.51 156.00
Triglyceride F(2,35) = 9.598,            p = 0.000 New POAG 4 0.6350 0.29126 0.14563 0.1715 1.0985 0.30 0.93
Normal 21 0.7852 0.37052 0.08085 0.6166 0.9539 0.40 2.17
POAG on Rx 13 1.4785 0.65578 0.18188 1.0822 1.8747 0.54 2.67
Total 38 1.0066 0.58441 0.09480 0.8145 1.1987 0.30 2.67

Serum alkaline phosphatase, alanine transaminase, and aspartate transaminase of the participants

The mean values for serum alkaline phosphatase, alanine transaminase, and aspartate transaminase in U/L for the three groups of participants are displayed in table 5. Alkaline phosphatase: newly POAG 64.3+28.4 U/L, normal participants 75.2 + 31.0 U/L and POAG on treatment 69.8 + .18.4 U/L, [F(2,35) = 0.353, p = 0.705]. Alanine transaminase: Newly diagnosed POAG 16.6 + 2.5 Ul/L, normal participants 18.9 + 10.8 U/L and POAG on treatment 22.1 + 7.4 U/L, [F(2,35) = 0.726, p = 0.491]. Aspartate transaminase: newly diagnosed POAG 24.1+2.5 U/L, normal participants 25.4+7.0 U/L and POAG on treatment 24.8 + 2.1 U/L, [F(2,35) = 0.104, p = 0.901].

Table 5. Analysis of serum alkaline phosphatase, alanine transaminase, and aspartate transaminase of the participants.
Serum Parameters (U/L) & ANOVA Group N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max
LB UB
ALP F(2,35) = 0.353, p = 0.705 New POAG 4 64.2500 28.39454 14.19727 19.0679 109.4321 39.00 105.00
Normal 21 75.2381 30.99339 6.76331 61.1301 89.3461 42.00 170.00
POAG on Rx 13 69.8462 18.37048 5.09505 58.7450 80.9473 51.00 99.00
Total 38 72.2368 26.60973 4.31667 63.4904 80.9832 39.00 170.00
ALT (SGPT) F(2,35) = 0.726,        p = 0.491 New POAG 4 16.5750 3.47215 1.73608 11.0500 22.1000 12.20 19.70
Normal 21 18.8619 10.82804 2.36287 13.9330 23.7908 4.00 45.80
POAG on Rx 13 22.0615 7.42737 2.05998 17.5732 26.5499 11.60 35.90
Total 38 19.7158 9.25523 1.50140 16.6737 22.7579 4.00 45.80
AST (SGOT) F(2,35) = 0.104,          p = 0.901 New POAG 4 24.0750 2.47167 1.23584 20.1420 28.0080 22.50 27.70
Normal 21 25.3476 6.98853 1.52502 22.1665 28.5288 16.80 40.80
POAG on Rx 13 24.8385 2.07145 .57452 23.5867 26.0902 21.90 28.30
Total 38 25.0395 5.33436 .86535 23.2861 26.7928 16.80 40.80

Discussion

This was a pilot study on serum parameters of Primary Open Angle Glaucoma (POAG) patients in a tertiary hospital. The fasting serum parameters, including electrolytes (Na, K, Cl, HCO3), proteins (Total, albumin, globulin), urea, Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN), creatinine, lipids (Cholesterol, triglyceride), and liver enzymes (ALP, ALT, AST), were analysed for three distinct groups of participants (38): Newly diagnosed POAG patients (antiglaucoma treatment naive), normal patients (non-glaucoma, not on antiglaucoma treatment), and POAG patients on antiglaucoma treatment. The study attempted to find out whether anti-glaucoma medication interferes with the serum parameters’ values. Should antiglaucoma medications interfere insignificantly with serum parameters and should this study affirmed previous report [7] of significant differences among selected serum parameters then such might be investigated further for potentials as POAG biomarkers.

Baseline Characteristics

The baseline characteristics of the study participants included age, sex, education, occupation, marital status, religion, ethnicity, family history of glaucoma, and comorbidities. The cohort consisted of 38 participants, with a mean age of 44.0 ± 14.2 years, and a nearly equal gender distribution. Most participants had tertiary education (71%) and were skilled workers (71%). Hypertension was the most common comorbidity (18.4%). A small proportion (13.2%) had a family history of glaucoma, which is a known risk factor for POAG [1,9]. Ethnic diversity was noted, with Yoruba and Igbo being the predominant groups. These findings align with previous studies highlighting demographic variations in glaucoma prevalence [5]. However, the small sample size limits generalizability [10]. The cohort had a relatively young mean age (44.0 ± 14.2 years), implying the working age group should be targeted for glaucoma screening towards early detection and appropriate management. The high proportion of tertiary-educated participants (71%) may reflect selection bias, as educated individuals are more likely to seek eye care. However, the study site is a tertiary public hospital located within a national capital space which is populated by many educated individuals who might be gainfully employed and able to afford glaucoma treatment. The predominance of Yoruba and Igbo participants aligns with regional demographics, but Hausa (5.3%) were underrepresented. Genetic and lifestyle differences among ethnic groups may affect glaucoma susceptibility [11].

Electrolyte Parameters

There were no observed significant differences in sodium, potassium, chloride, or total carbon dioxide levels between newly diagnosed POAG, normal participants, and POAG on treatment (p > 0.05). This suggests that electrolyte imbalances may not play a major role in POAG pathogenesis or treatment response. However, some studies have linked altered potassium levels to Intraocular Pressure (IOP) fluctuations [12]. The wide standard deviations, particularly in potassium levels (Normal participants: 10.6 ± 28.3 mmol/L), indicate high variability. The extreme potassium value is physiologically implausible (normal range: 3.5-5.0 mmol/L). This suggests haemolysis during sample processing or lab error, warranting exclusion or retesting [13]. Chloride levels were consistent across groups, supporting prior findings that chloride channels may not play a major role in POAG [14]. Though nonsignificant intergroup differences, sodium was the highest in newly diagnosed POAG (139.0 mmol/L). Sodium-potassium pumps (Na⁺/K⁺-ATPase) in the ciliary epithelium regulate aqueous humor production. Dysregulation may contribute to IOP elevation [15]. Also of note, no significant differences in chloride and total CO2 across groups, but chloride levels were marginally higher in POAG (106.0 vs. 104.8 mmol/L in normal). Physiologically, chloride channels (CFTR - Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator) modulate trabecular meshwork outflow. Polymorphisms in CFTR are linked to glaucoma risk [16]. Moreover, different glaucoma drugs may uniquely affect electrolyte balance. For instance, oral Carbonic Anhydrase Inhibitors (CAIs) are more likely to cause metabolic acidosis, lowering serum bicarbonate [17].

Protein Parameters

This work observed total protein levels were significantly different among groups (p = 0.048), with POAG on treatment showing slightly higher levels (7.8 ± 0.4 g/dL). Albumin and globulin fractions did not differ significantly. The higher total protein in treated POAG (7.8 g/dL) could reflect chronic inflammation from long-term medication use, such as prostaglandin analogs which upregulate cytokines like IL-6 [18,19]. Elevated gamma-globulin in treated POAG (1.7 ± 0.2 g/dL) may suggest an immune or inflammatory response to therapy [20], further supported by the immunological implications of elevated gamma-globulins, as autoantibodies against retinal proteins are reported in POAG [21]. The clinical relevance of these minor variations requires further investigation. Elevated levels of gamma-globulin in treated POAG (1.7 g/dL) may indicate immune activation, as some glaucoma drugs (e.g., prostaglandin analogs) modulate cytokines [22]. Alpha-2-macroglobulin, though not measured here, is implicated in glaucoma via TGF-β signalling, suggesting further studies should include this marker [23]. Meanwhile, measuring specific inflammatory markers such as C-Reactive Protein (CRP) can confirm systemic inflammation in treated POAG as well as IL-6/TNF-α, the Cytokines linked to trabecular meshwork degeneration [24].

Renal Function Parameters (Urea, BUN, Creatinine)

Significant differences were observed in urea (p = 0.011) and BUN (p = 0.014), with POAG on treatment showing higher levels than newly diagnosed and normal participants. Drugs such as oral CAIs (Acetazolamide) inhibit renal carbonic anhydrase, reducing bicarbonate reabsorption and increasing urea excretion [25]. Furthermore, hypertension, present in 18.4% of the cohort, independently elevates BUN [26]. Creatinine was also elevated in treated POAG (85.7 ± 16.4 μmol/L) but not significantly (p = 0.085). These findings suggest potential renal function alterations in glaucoma patients on long-term medication, possibly due to drug metabolism [27], as carbonic anhydrase inhibitors are known to affect renal parameters [28]. Topical CAIs rarely affect renal labs, but oral CAIs can elevate urea/BUN [29]. The higher mean creatinine in treated POAG (85.7 μmol/L) may reflect age-related decline in Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR), not solely drug effects [30]. Medication records are needed to clarify this finding, and the creatinine trend toward higher levels in treated POAG warrants continued monitoring.

Lipid Profile

It was also observed that triglyceride levels were significantly higher in POAG on treatment (1.5 ± 0.7 mmol/L, p < 0.001), while total cholesterol, HDL, and LDL did not differ significantly. Elevated triglycerides may reflect metabolic changes due to glaucoma therapy or comorbid conditions [31]. Prostaglandin analogs (Latanoprost) may alter lipid metabolism through PPAR-γ modulation [32], though evidence is conflicting [33]. Some studies link dyslipidemias to glaucoma risk [34], and metabolic syndrome (Hypertension + dyslipidemia) is associated with POAG progression [35]. Future studies should correlate lipid profiles with specific glaucoma medications. Some studies suggest statins (A potential confounder) reduce IOP by improving trabecular outflow [36].

Liver Enzyme Parameters

No significant differences were found in ALP, ALT, or AST among groups (p > 0.05). This suggests that liver function is not markedly affected in POAG or its treatment. However, ALT levels were slightly higher in treated POAG (22.1 ± 7.4 U/L) - though within normal limits (< 40 U/L) - possibly indicating mild drug-induced liver stress [37]. This merits monitoring, as oral CAIs rarely cause hepatotoxicity, even in mild, long-term use [38]. Baseline liver tests are recommended before initiating oral Carbonic Anhydrase Inhibitors (CAIs) [38]. Larger studies with longitudinal monitoring are needed [39].

Study Limitations

It is important to acknowledge the limitations in this study for better understanding and interpretations of the findings. The study’s small sample size of 38 participants restricts its statistical power and limits the ability to generalize the findings to a broader population [10]. The cross-sectional design only reveals associations between variables without establishing cause-and-effect relationships. The study did not adequately control for potential confounding variables such as diet, medication adherence, and existing comorbidities which may influence the study outcomes. Laboratory results showed variability, particularly the anomalous potassium value (10.6 mmol/L ± 28.3 mmol/L), far outside normal physiological ranges, suggesting measurement or procedural errors [13]. Furthermore, the analysis did not differentiate between glaucoma medication classes, making it difficult to attribute observed effects to any specific drug. Finally, the study did not report the duration of glaucoma treatment, a critical factor for assessing time-related effects of therapy. Moreover, Intraocular Pressure (IOP) was not part of the analysis, leaving an incomplete understanding of how the investigated variables relate to glaucoma severity or control.

Conclusion

The study did not reveal clear differences among the three groups that would support definitive conclusions about the evaluated serum parameters in POAG, particularly given the small sample size. Some minor variations were observed in serum proteins, urea, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and triglycerides across treatment-naive POAG patients, normal controls, and treated POAG cases. Most electrolytes, liver enzymes, and lipid measures showed no significant differences. The slightly higher triglycerides and urea levels in treated POAG patients may suggest possible metabolic effects related to therapy, but this requires further investigation. Larger, longitudinal studies are necessary to validate these findings and clarify their clinical relevance. Despite its limitations, this study adds preliminary insight into systemic biochemical changes associated with glaucoma, although the clinical implications of the subtle metabolic differences observed remain uncertain.

Recommendations

Future (Fully funded) research should focus on larger cohorts with detailed medication histories and long-term follow-up (age-matched controls and longitudinal) to clarify the systemic effects of glaucoma and its treatment. The investigated biomarkers should be expanded to include alpha-2-macroglobulin, GGT, and eGFR. Research should prioritize multi-centre studies with IOP correlation and oxidative stress markers.

There should be standardized protocols to minimize variability, especially fasting blood samples, repeat assays, and medication logs. There should be medication-specific analyses to differentiate drug effects from disease pathology. There should be correlation analysis of biochemical parameters with IOP to assess if biochemical changes predict IOP fluctuations.

Clinicians should periodically (Annually) monitor renal and metabolic parameters (Lipids, blood sugar etc) in POAG patients on long-term therapy, especially those with comorbidities like hypertension and diabetes. The prostaglandin analogs should be preferred over Carbonic Anhydrase Inhibitors (CAIs) in patients with metabolic syndrome.

Acknowledgments

The participants in this study were recruited among the patients who presented for eye care services at the Department of Ophthalmology, University of Abuja Teaching Hospital (UATH), Gwagwalada, Abuja, Nigeria. Both UATH and participants are appreciated.

Declaration of conflicting interest

None of the authors has any conflict of interest to disclose.

Funding Statement

This pilot study was funded by Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund) under 2023 University of Abuja TETFund Institutional Research Grant of Two million Naira (about $1,250) [TETF/DR&D/CE/UNI/ABUJA/IBR/2021/VOL.1].

This study was approved by the Institution Review Board. Further, information on this study was explained to each of the participants and written informed consent was obtained. The study was conducted following the tenets of declaration of Helsinki on research conduct in human participants.

Data Availability Statement

The data is available with corresponding author and can be accessed on demand.

How to Cite
Ayanniyi AA*, Rauf RI, Tor AA, Jideofor CM, Abaya GJ and Alao OG. (2026). Serum Parameters of Primary Open Angle Glaucoma Patients in a Tertiary Hospital - A Pilot Study. J Biomed Res Environ Sci. 7(2), 1-12. doi: 10.37871/jbres2270
References
  1. Tham YC, Li X, Wong TY, Quigley HA, Aung T, Cheng CY. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2014 Nov;121(11):2081-90. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.05.013. Epub 2014 Jun 26. PMID: 24974815.
  2. Weinreb RN, Aung T, Medeiros FA. The pathophysiology and treatment of glaucoma: a review. JAMA. 2014 May 14;311(18):1901-11. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.3192. PMID: 24825645; PMCID: PMC4523637.
  3. Stein JD, Khawaja AP, Weizer JS. Glaucoma in Adults-Screening, Diagnosis, and Management: A Review. JAMA. 2021 Jan 12;325(2):164-174. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.21899. PMID: 33433580.
  4. Michels TC, Ivan O. Glaucoma: Diagnosis and Management. Am Fam Physician. 2023 Mar;107(3):253-262. PMID: 36920817.
  5. Ayanniyi A, Mahmoud A, John-Sam O, Rauf R, Ejeba D, Akasike-Enuh R, Bisiriyu O, Afam-Osemene M, Chijioke E, Damter A, Agwadu L. The Socio-demographic and clinical profiles of patients with primary open angle glaucoma in Gwagwalada, Nigeria. Transactions of the Ophthalmological Society of Nigeria. 2024;8(1).
  6. Ayanniyi AA, Mahmoud AO, JohnSam YO, Rauf RI, Ejeba DP, Akasike-Enuh RU, Oviasu JO, Nwegbu MM. Survey of eye patients' serum for biomarkers of primary open angle glaucoma in Gwagwalada, Nigeria: serum biomarkers for primary open angle glaucoma. Int Ophthalmol. 2025 Apr 10;45(1):151. doi: 10.1007/s10792-025-03519-0. PMID: 40208393.
  7. Ayanniyi AA, Mahmoud AO, JohnSam YO, Rauf RI, Ejeba DP, Akasike-Enuh RU, Oviasu JO, Nwegbu MM. Survey of eye patients' serum for biomarkers of primary open angle glaucoma in Gwagwalada, Nigeria: serum biomarkers for primary open angle glaucoma. Int Ophthalmol. 2025 Apr 10;45(1):151. doi: 10.1007/s10792-025-03519-0. PMID: 40208393.
  8. Ayanniyi AA, Mahmoud AO, Johnsam OY, Rauf RI, Oviasu JO. Survey of eye patients' haematology parameters for possible biomarkers of primary open angle glaucoma in Gwagwalada, Nigeria. Trans Ophthalmol Soc Niger. 2023;8(1):49-57.
  9. Allison K, Patel D, Alabi O. Epidemiology of Glaucoma: The Past, Present, and Predictions for the Future. Cureus. 2020 Nov 24;12(11):e11686. doi: 10.7759/cureus.11686. PMID: 33391921; PMCID: PMC7769798.
  10. Kapetanakis VV, Chan MP, Foster PJ, Cook DG, Owen CG, Rudnicka AR. Global variations and time trends in the prevalence of primary open angle glaucoma (POAG): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Ophthalmol. 2016 Jan;100(1):86-93. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307223. Epub 2015 Aug 18. PMID: 26286821; PMCID: PMC4717368.
  11. Abu-Amero K, Kondkar AA, Chalam KV. An Updated Review on the Genetics of Primary Open Angle Glaucoma. Int J Mol Sci. 2015 Dec 4;16(12):28886-911. doi: 10.3390/ijms161226135. PMID: 26690118; PMCID: PMC4691082.
  12. Reina-Torres E, De Ieso ML, Pasquale LR, Madekurozwa M, van Batenburg-Sherwood J, Overby DR, Stamer WD. The vital role for nitric oxide in intraocular pressure homeostasis. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2021 Jul;83:100922. doi: 10.1016/j.preteyeres.2020.100922. Epub 2020 Nov 28. PMID: 33253900; PMCID: PMC8160027.
  13. THOMPSON GS, JONES ES. ERRORS IN THE MEASUREMENT OF SERUM ELECTROLYTES. J Clin Pathol. 1965 Jul;18(4):443-5. doi: 10.1136/jcp.18.4.443. PMID: 14318696; PMCID: PMC472975.
  14. Civan MM, Macknight AD. The ins and outs of aqueous humour secretion. Exp Eye Res. 2004 Mar;78(3):625-31. doi: 10.1016/j.exer.2003.09.021. PMID: 15106942.
  15. Seidel A, Liu L, Jiang Y, Steinle JJ. Loss of TLR4 in endothelial cells but not Müller cells protects the diabetic retina. Exp Eye Res. 2021 May;206:108557. doi: 10.1016/j.exer.2021.108557. Epub 2021 Mar 28. PMID: 33789141; PMCID: PMC8087637.
  16. Vollrath D, Liu Y. Chloride channels and glaucoma: A mini-review. Genes (Basel). 2021;12(5):714. doi: 10.3390/genes12050714.
  17. Supuran CT. Carbonic anhydrase inhibitors. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2010 Jun 15;20(12):3467-74. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2010.05.009. PMID: 20529676.
  18. Subbulakshmi S, Kavitha S, Venkatesh R. Prostaglandin analogs in ophthalmology. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2023 May;71(5):1768-1776. doi: 10.4103/IJO.IJO_2706_22. PMID: 37203029; PMCID: PMC10391402.
  19. Baudouin C, Kolko M, Melik-Parsadaniantz S, Messmer EM. Inflammation in Glaucoma: From the back to the front of the eye, and beyond. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2021 Jul;83:100916. doi: 10.1016/j.preteyeres.2020.100916. Epub 2020 Oct 17. PMID: 33075485.
  20. Tezel G, Wax MB. The immune system and glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2004 Apr;15(2):80-4. doi: 10.1097/00055735-200404000-00003. PMID: 15021215.
  21. Tezel G. Immune regulation toward immunomodulation for neuroprotection in glaucoma. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2013 Feb;13(1):23-31. doi: 10.1016/j.coph.2012.09.013. Epub 2012 Oct 19. PMID: 23084793; PMCID: PMC3529855.
  22. Weinreb RN, Liebmann JM, Martin KR, Kaufman PL, Vittitow JL. Latanoprostene Bunod 0.024% in Subjects With Open-angle Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension: Pooled Phase 3 Study Findings. J Glaucoma. 2018 Jan;27(1):7-15. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000831. PMID: 29194198; PMCID: PMC7654727.
  23. Tektas OY, Lütjen-Drecoll E. Structural changes of the trabecular meshwork in different kinds of glaucoma. Exp Eye Res. 2009 Apr;88(4):769-75. doi: 10.1016/j.exer.2008.11.025. Epub 2008 Dec 6. PMID: 19114037.
  24. Wakefield D, Lloyd A. The role of cytokines in the pathogenesis of inflammatory eye disease. Cytokine. 1992 Jan;4(1):1-5. doi: 10.1016/1043-4666(92)90028-p. PMID: 1617154.
  25. Supuran CT, Altamimi ASA, Carta F. Carbonic anhydrase inhibition and the management of glaucoma: a literature and patent review 2013-2019. Expert Opin Ther Pat. 2019 Oct;29(10):781-792. doi: 10.1080/13543776.2019.1679117. Epub 2019 Oct 15. PMID: 31596641.
  26. Nislawati R, Taufik Fadillah Zainal A, Ismail A, Waspodo N, Kasim F, Gunawan AMAK. Role of hypertension as a risk factor for open-angle glaucoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2021 Sep 28;6(1):e000798. doi: 10.1136/bmjophth-2021-000798. PMID: 34632075; PMCID: PMC8479953.
  27. Holló G, Topouzis F, Fechtner RD. Fixed-combination intraocular pressure-lowering therapy for glaucoma and ocular hypertension: advantages in clinical practice. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2014 Aug;15(12):1737-47. doi: 10.1517/14656566.2014.936850. Epub 2014 Jul 5. PMID: 24998246.
  28. Inoue K. Managing adverse effects of glaucoma medications. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014 May 12;8:903-13. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S44708. PMID: 24872675; PMCID: PMC4025938.
  29. Thein AS, Hedengran A, Azuara-Blanco A, Arita R, Cvenkel B, Gazzard G, Heegaard S, de Paiva CS, Petrovski G, Prokosch-Willing V, Utheim TP, Virgili G, Kolko M. Adverse Effects and Safety in Glaucoma Patients: Agreement on Clinical Trial Outcomes for Reports on Eye Drops (ASGARD)-A Delphi Consensus Statement. Am J Ophthalmol. 2022 Sep;241:190-197. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2022.05.007. Epub 2022 May 18. PMID: 35594917.
  30. Levey AS, Stevens LA. Estimating GFR using the CKD Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) creatinine equation: more accurate GFR estimates, lower CKD prevalence estimates, and better risk predictions. Am J Kidney Dis. 2010 Apr;55(4):622-7. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2010.02.337. PMID: 20338463; PMCID: PMC2846308.
  31. Jeyanthi R, Rajeevan SAR, Gopal B, Tony M, Rinita. Association between primary open‐angle glaucoma and serum lipid profile.  Res J Med Sci. 2024;18:221‐225. doi: 10.36478/makrjms.2024.7.221.225.
  32. Raza ST, Singh P, Singh L, Abbas M, Srivastava N, Mahdi F. PPAR-γ and CYP46A1 genes polymorphism is associated with Primary Open Angle Glaucoma (POAG) in hypertensive North Indians. Egypt J Med Hum Genet. 2017;18(2):121-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmhg.2016.04.005.
  33. Cure E, Cumhur Cure M. Emerging risks of lipid-lowering therapy and low LDL levels: implications for eye, brain, and new-onset diabetes. Lipids Health Dis. 2025 May 21;24(1):185. doi: 10.1186/s12944-025-02606-6. PMID: 40399888; PMCID: PMC12093843.
  34. Oh SW, Lee S, Park C, Kim DJ. Elevated intraocular pressure is associated with insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2005 Sep-Oct;21(5):434-40. doi: 10.1002/dmrr.529. PMID: 15651065.
  35. Li F, Luo Y, Li X, Dai Y, Xiang Q. Association between metabolic syndrome and the risk of glaucoma: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2024 Dec 18;16(1):300. doi: 10.1186/s13098-024-01532-4. PMID: 39696489; PMCID: PMC11657432.
  36. McCann P, Hogg RE, Fallis R, Azuara-Blanco A. The Effect of Statins on Intraocular Pressure and on the Incidence and Progression of Glaucoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2016 May 1;57(6):2729-48. doi: 10.1167/iovs.15-18595. PMID: 27196321.
  37. Andrade RJ, Chalasani N, Björnsson ES, Suzuki A, Kullak-Ublick GA, Watkins PB, Devarbhavi H, Merz M, Lucena MI, Kaplowitz N, Aithal GP. Drug-induced liver injury. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2019 Aug 22;5(1):58. doi: 10.1038/s41572-019-0105-0. PMID: 31439850.
  38. Hu CY, Lee BJ, Cheng HF, Wang CY. Acetazolamide-related life-threatening hypophosphatemia in a glaucoma patient. J Glaucoma. 2015 Apr-May;24(4):e31-3. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000185. PMID: 25333610.
  39. Schuster AK, Erb C, Hoffmann EM, Dietlein T, Pfeiffer N. The Diagnosis and Treatment of Glaucoma. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2020 Mar 27;117(13):225-234. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2020.0225. PMID: 32343668; PMCID: PMC7196841.
Publish with JBRES Peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary Open Access with rapid review, DOI, and global visibility.
Double-Blind CrossRef DOI Discoverable
Submit Manuscript Membership