With respect to primary and secondary glaucoma, does this usually call for any difference in treatment between them?
For example, if it can be reasonably deduced that an external trigger (injury, repeated activity, etc.) spiked IOP enough to eventually cause optic nerve damage, is this damage projected to be progressive and still have an ongoing effect on IOP, even when the original trigger has been removed?
Since the reason(s) behind my recent diagnosis is still undetermined and my doctor is laser-focused on treatment (rather than discussing potential causes), I'm just curious if and how the type of glaucoma can affect the approach to treatment long-term, when the optic nerve damage may not have been due to a genetic or internal cause so to speak (e.g., there has never been a history whatsoever in my family, both immediate and extended). As always, thanks again for any insight you can help provide me with. So appreciated!
Many thanks for your prompt response, David.
Just to clarify, whenever the optic nerve is damaged through external trigger, let's say 15%, the remaining 85% is unable to stabilize on its own from there? If I'm understanding correctly, the portion of dead nerves will then have a domino effect on the remaining healthy nerves, until we do our best to limit or slowdown the progression through medications, procedures, surgeries and neuroprotective supplements?
None of this relationship has been explained to me by my medical providers, so thank you again for helping me (and other readers) better understand how the optic nerve functions once damaged.
Unfortunately, that is the usual case. Why it happens is an active area of research. I wish I could give you a simple explanation, but everything I have read on this topic is very complex and incompletely understood.
Thank you again for your prompt response, David, and helping me better understand this condition. Much appreciated!