I recently had my bitch Gonioscopy tested, sadly she didn't pass and was listed as affected. My question is we had about 30-40 minutes to wait from the drop being administered to her being examined by the specialist. Is that likely to have had an effect? A friend who has a breed that also needs the gonioscopy test said that 10 minutes is the norm from drops in to examination.  Needless to say i was devastated when he said she hadn't passed, he's well known and i was recommended to use this specialist as he is very good.  He suggested/recommended a second opinion but it's unlikely according to him they'd find reason to pass her. Is it worthwhile re testing her?
Thanks for any comments/suggestions.
Helen

The eye drops leave the eye dilated upto 4 hours so no it will not affect the result

Hi - sorry to hear your dog failed.
in one of my 2 breeds they only have the gonioscopy done (under schedule B)and do not require eye drops apart from local at the time before they put the contact lens in . I asked about this it was explained that for the gonioscopy they look at the drainage points which are at the front of the eye (ie in front of the pupil) . The drops they put in before the eye test dilate the pupil so they can look at the back of the eye (if needed for the eye test) to look for things like PRA. If this makes sense then as already said it should not affect the eye test.

Actually the eye drops should not be put in so long b4 and DOES affect the result.  I would insist on having it redone.  For other eye tests the drops can be in well b4 testing for other eye diseases but should not be for gonioscopies.  I would be asking to have the dog retested and for the drops to be put in just b4 the test.

Thank you for taking the time to reply. I was told this is the forum to find out more about everything dog related and looking at the topics people have posted it's certainly an informative place.
I'll certainly arrange to have her tested again. Should I do it soon and use the same vet or ask another specialist to look at her? I was told a good eye vet will see what he/she needs to see without drops, but whey put them in then if it's that visible? I thought the drops must make a difference or why use them and i had thought when my friend said they should be examined within 10 or minutes i thought that wasn't the way it was for my dog.
Thank you Helen.

Just wanted to update my original post. Thank you to those who originally commented.
I've since had my bitch re tested and to my utter disbelief she passed, i couldn't believe it. I'd went for a 2nd opinion with the belief she would fail but this eye vet said he had no concern with her. He happily passed her. I did ask him why she'd failed previously and he did she was possibly too young, and needed more growth time and occasionally debris in the eye can give a false result.  (this time she was looked at 10 minutes after drops went in, which I'm told would have we better result than before as we had to wait so long). So a few factors can give varying results.
I am over the moon and glad i took a 2nd opinion.  It really is making me question how accurate some of these eye testing vets are, I've never had any dog tested before as this is my first dog and heard so many comments from doggy people (some with 40 years plus experience) saying again as it's purely one vets opinion on that particular day. That being said i would've accepted the result and never thought of re testing, glad i did but how may others take the first decision by the specialist and accept it?

What a relief for you - well done for persevering

So how old was she when tested?

Hi, she was 6 months going on 7 months when I had her looked at originally. Maybe in hindsight she was too young? She was looked at again end of last week. She's 12 months at the end of December.  Knowing what I know now nearing 12 months was maybe a better age.

Probably your right 6 months too young

So pleased for you.  :-)

This wouldn't be the first case I've read about that having failed once, passed when repeated.    I'm all for testing, but there is always some element of throwing the baby out with the bathwater about this test.  Although more and more being done in my breed (are we talking the same I wonder?) it is only the test to show the pre-disposition for glaucoma, not that the hound WILL develop glaucoma.   I know of at least one hound, a decade at least back now when this was wheeled out, who failed.   He was otherwise a beautiful boy with lots to offer the breed.   Having failed, he was lost to the breed.   I never discovered whether he lived out his days without developing glaucoma.   I do know of another who was borderline, and died fully sighted and didn't pass this on. 

Again I'm all for testing, but tended to only do this if I started having a significant problem within my bloodlines.   Sometimes we tend to go overboard - common sense?    I know I had a leading eye specialist on the phone when some other puppies by a sire I'd used failed.  He came in saying 'we'd better look at your puppies'.  And they were only young puppies.    I said hang on, I'm not ready to do that.   He backed right off without more comment leaving me to think 'kerching'.   And actually the problem didn't come from the male, further research showed!!

It's good news if you got a pass on your girl, but it does perhaps throw up serious questions about this particular test? 

"Goniodysgenesis is the predisposing abnormality to primary angle-closure glaucoma."   KCSB Records.

Thank you for your reply MamaBas, my dog is a gundog not sure if i can say what breed but those will know which ones get the glaucoma test (amongst the other tests needed). You speak a lot of sense and it's good to know that a fail didn't necessarily mean the end for her (should i want to breed her). I've done so much looking into this and i think is highly unfair (especially with my dog who was quite young) to have her labelled affected forever.
I have looked into a lot of American notes on glaucoma and they seem to grade affected eyes rather than the UK pass / fail system.  I think testing is good but as i've found it's very subjective and like MamaBas suggests it needs to be taken into consideration along with the dog as a whole.  Knowing what i now know and speaking to a lot of people it's worthwhile testing again.  She is from a line of dogs that have passed which added to the disappointment of her original result. 

From my understanding only the first test result will be published by the Kennel Club. Is that likely to change in the future, surely subsequent eye tests should be logged and published also? Has anyone had experience in re testing results being published?

I'd call the KC and ask because the Registration Certificate of any future progeny would surely carry the information that the failed partner had failed.   Clearly if you now have a pass, this situation needs to be corrected.

Certainly in eye tests that my dogs have had it is the most recent result that is on the registration documents, but on the health test results finder previous ones are listed but not all (I assume only the most recent plus ones since the mate select came into being).

We are not tested for Gonodysgenisis, but I can't see they would be different for each disease, these are clinical eye exams not DNA tests.