Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Офтальмология / Английские материалы / Atlas of Glaucoma, Second Edition_Choplin, Lundy_2007

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
28.03.2026
Размер:
32.57 Mб
Скачать

282 Atlas of glaucoma

or damaged or when there are structural abnormali-

Medical Optics, Santa Ana, CA) to be most effec-

ties and anomalies in the limbal and paralimbal

tive in achieving the desired results.

 

regions. Of note, argon laser trabeculoplasty and

 

 

 

 

selective laser trabeculoplasty are not contraindica-

Procedure

 

 

tions to NPGS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NPGS can be performed under topical (authors’

 

preference), peribulbar or retrobulbar anesthesia.

TECHNIQUE

The common elements of both procedures are

 

illustrated in Figures 18.5–18.13. The steps specific

Instruments and devices

for DS are presented in Figures 18.3, 18.14, 18.15,

Aside from the regular instrumentation required to

and those for VC in Figures 18.4, 18.16, 18.17. Of

note, many surgeons combine techniques used in

perform trabeculectomies, there are a few addi-

VC (i.e. injection of viscoelastic into Schlemm’s

tional instruments that are beneficial when per-

canal) with DS.

 

 

forming NPGS. Diamond blades are particularly

 

 

If

performing

phacoemulsification

concur-

suited to performing NPGS, given the high degree

rently,

the phacoemulsification should

be per-

of accuracy that is required when creating the scle-

formed first. In order to perform NPGS immediately

ral flaps. Two diamond blades have been specifi-

following phacoemulsification, it is imperative that

cally designed for NPGS (Figure 18.2).

the anterior chamber be adequately pressurized to

Peeling of the inner wall of SC is facilitated by for-

facilitate proper scleral dissection. Viscoelastic

ceps specifically designed for that purpose, the most

should

be left in

the anterior chamber

after the

common being the Mermoud forceps (Figure 18.3).

insertion of the IOL, and removed following the

Maintenance of the scleral lake, which has been

excision of the deep flap with an irrigation syringe

shown to greatly improve the efficacy of DS, is

(i.e. 27-gauge cannula) instead of the mechanical

accomplished with a space-maintaining device.

irrigation and aspiration which could raise the IOP

The AquaFlow Collagen Drainage Device (Staar

and result in rupture of the TDW.

 

Surgical, Monrovia, CA) is the most commonly

 

 

 

 

 

used implant (Table 18.2). Other devices include

Intraoperative complications

 

the SKGEL® implant (Corneal, Paris, France), which

 

 

 

 

 

is an absorbable reticulated collagen implant, and

Complications related to the superficial flap can be

the T-Flux implant (Ioltech, France), which is

managed similarly to flap complications encoun-

biocompatible but non-absorbable.

tered during trabeculectomy. The most significant

In VC, cannulation of the cut ends of SC

intraoperative complication that may occur during

requires the use of a 150 m diameter polished

NPGS is inadvertent perforation of the TDW,

cannula (Greishaber, Switzerland) (Figure 18.4).

which can be classified as either a microperfora-

Subsequent to cannulation, a viscoelastic agent is

tion or a macroperforation. Microperforations are

injected. Studies have shown Healon 5 (Advanced

often occult and result in a small and localized leak

(a)

(b)

Figure 18.3 DS – Peeling of the inner wall of Schlemm’s canal. (a) After the removal of the deeper scleral flap, the inner wall of SC is peeled with specially designed forceps. (b) It will often come in one strip spanning the width of the dissection, appearing as a transparent tubular structure once peeled. Upon successful completion of this step, the surgeon will notice an immediate increase in the percolation of fluid through the TDM.

 

 

Non-penetrating surgery 283

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 18.2 Implants for DS: types and usage

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Implant

Number of clinical trials

 

 

 

 

Staar AquaFlow collagen drainage device

20

 

 

 

 

(absorbable collagen implant)

 

 

 

 

 

SKGEL implant

3

 

 

 

 

(absorbable reticulated collagen implant)

 

 

 

 

 

T-Flux implant

3

 

 

 

 

(biocompatible, non-absorbable)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

(b)

Figure 18.4 VC – Intubation of Schlemm’s canal. A paracentesis is performed to create a mild degree of hypotony in order that blood is refluxed from SC, thereby allowing for the localization of the cut ends (a). SC is then intubated with a Grieshaber cannula (b) and high-viscosity viscoelastic material is injected into each cut end five to six times – widening SC and thus improving flow through SC.

Figure 18.5 Creation of fornix-based conjunctival flap.

After the application of anesthetic, a fornix-based flap is created in the superior temporal or nasal quadrant.

of aqueous with no loss of anterior chamber depth or iris prolapse, and as such are effectively inconsequential and may even contribute to enhanced IOL lowering. Macroperforations are grossly evident violations of the TDW and result in anterior

chamber instability. This often necessitates conversion to standard trabeculectomy, although some surgeons have managed to tamponade the perforation with a collagen implant (Aquaflow device).

POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT

Immediate

The post-operative management of NPGS is similar to that following a standard trabeculectomy. Patients are placed on topical antibiotics and steroids. Subconjunctival antimetabolite injections are used in a parallel manner with respect to indication, technique, timing and dosing. The major distinction in the post-operative care in NPGS from standard trabeculectomy is the contraindication of ocular massage by either the surgeon or the patient – this may rupture the TDW. Some surgeons also administer pilocarpine post-operatively to prevent iris apposition to the TDW.

284 Atlas of glaucoma

(a)

(b)

Figure 18.6 Creation of the superficial flap. (a) After undermining surrounding conjunctiva and achieving hemostasis with minimal to no cautery, the outline of the superficial scleral flap is scored. In DS, the flap is 5 mm 5 mm square, whereas in VC it is a parabolic flap that enhances the watertight closure. It is imperative in both VC and DS that the superficial flap be carried 1–2 mm into clear cornea. (b) The thickness of the superficial flap should be 33–50% of scleral thickness.

Figure 18.7 Application of mitomycin C. Traditionally, the use of mitomycin C (MMC) and other antimetabolites was avoided in NPGS. However, more surgeons are using antibmetabolite therapy as an adjunctive therapy with NPGS. Most surgeons will apply MMC at the completion of the superficial flap. Note that the MMC-soaked sponge is being held under the superficial flap while the edge of the conjunctival flap is being elevated to preclude wound leaks.

Long term

In DS, the collagen implant typically dissolves by 9 months, after which time the scleral lake will maintain itself (Figure 18.18), providing the important conduit of aqueous flow. Late increases in IOP are related to increased resistance at the TDW (healing of microperforations), intrascleral lake fibrosis, or episcleral fibrosis (Table 18.3). If IOP increases above target postoperatively, laser goniopuncture (Figures 18.19, 18.20) should be attempted first, and is required in 10–63% of cases (Table 18.4). Although this effectively converts NPGS to a penetrating procedure, performed in the

Figure 18.8 Outline of the deep flap. The next step is the creation of the deeper flap at 90% scleral thickness, which represents the most technically challenging step of NPGS, and should be performed under high magnification. The dimensions of the deeper flap are slightly smaller than those of the superficial flap. In DS it is a 4 mm 4 mm square flap, whereas it is a smaller parabola in VC. Here the outline of the deeper flap has been scored with the ‘Safety Trifact’ diamond blade.

safety of the postoperative period after bleb formation, it dramatically reduces the concern for hypotony-related problems. Intrascleral or episcleral fibrosis should be considered and managed as in trabeculectomy, with antimetabolite and needling.

Rarely, an acute rise in IOP after NPGS can occur due to iris adherence or incarceration at the TDW in the early postoperative period or following goniopuncture – particularly if the openings are too large or placed too posteriorly. Iris incarceration can be managed with Nd:YAG synechiolysis and/or argon laser peripheral iridoplasty. Failing laser treatment, the iris can be swept away with

 

 

 

 

Non-penetrating surgery 285

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 18.3 Postoperative IOP elevation – causes and management

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TDW fibrosis

Iris incarceration

Bleb encapsulation

Bleb fibrosis

 

 

IOP

↑↑↑

 

Postoperative time

Late

Early

Early

Mid–late

 

TDW configuration

Concave

PAS

Convex

Concave or convex

 

Bleb

Low, small

Low, small

Large, tense

Flat, thickened

 

Management

Nd:YAG

Synechiolysis and/

Medication ±

Needling

 

 

Goniopuncture

or iridoplasty

needling

 

 

 

TDW, trabeculo-Descemet’s window.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 18.4 Literature review of goniopuncture

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author

 

 

 

 

El Sayed

Mermoud

Shaarawy

Ahmed

Surgery

DS

DSCI

VC

DSCI

Incidence (%)

10.3

41

37

63

 

 

Mean time* (months)

9.6

9.9

9.4

6.7

 

 

IOP change (mmHg)

↓7.4

22.0 → 12.5

20.0 → 12.6

19.6 → 13.5

DS, deep sclerectomy; DSCI, deep sclerectomy with collagen implant; VC, viscocanalostomy. *Time from surgery to time of goniopuncture.

(a)

(b)

Figure 18.9 Starting the deeper flap dissection. (a) Beginning posteriorly, the sclera is incised. Some surgeons advocate cutting down to the suprachoroidal space, hence creating a full-thickness scleral incision, in order to help determine the 90% thickness depth, which leaves approximately a 75–100- m bed. (b) and (c) At the correct depth, the surgeon will notice the irregular arrangement of scleral fibers with the deep purple hue of the choroid clearly visible. Note in (b) that the suprachoroidal space was intentionally entered posteriorly to help determine the appropriate depth of the dissection.

(c)

286 Atlas of glaucoma

Outer wall of SC being lifted

Inner wall of SC

Scleral spur

Figure 18.10 Continuing the deep flap dissection. At the correct depth, advancing the flap anteriorly, the scleral fibers in the dissection bed change from a random arrangement, to an organized arrangement circumferential to the limbus; this represents the glistening white scleral spur which is just posterior to SC. Continuing the dissection forward at this level will unroof SC beyond which is a natural plane between Descemet’s membrane and the overlying stroma requiring little, or no force to advance.

Figure 18.11 Finishing the deep flap dissection. The dissection must continue at least 1 mm into clear cornea to create an adequate TDM. Vertical relaxing incisions are required at the lateral edges of the flap to carry the flap into the cornea. Great care must be taken not to rupture DM which is susceptible to trauma at this step – this is facilitated using a ‘Safety Trifacet’ diamond blade. The TDW may be bulging forward if the IOP is very elevated, increasing the risk of inadvertent rupture; therefore, it would be prudent to perform a paracentesis in this circumstance.

Outer wall of SC

Scleral Spur

(a)

(b)

Figure 18.12 Complete deep flap dissection. Upon completion of the deep dissection, the surgeon will notice the percolation of fluid on the surface of the TDM window. Note the outer wall of SC on the undersurface of the deep flap (a). This figure also illustrates the change in scleral fiber arrangement at the scleral spur as well as the desired anterior extent of the deep dissection. Note the smooth undersurface of the deep flap beyond the SC

(b) indicative of the natural cleavage plane between DM and the overlying stroma. (c) Schematic view of this dissection.

(c)

Non-penetrating surgery 287

(a)

(b)

Figure 18.13 Removing the deeper flap. The deep flap must be excised to create space for the scleral lake. Removal of the flap is facilitated by the scoring of the undersurface of the flap (a) prior to using fine Vanna scissors (b).

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

 

Figure 18.14 DS – Placement of collagen implant. (a,b) To

 

fixate the collagen implant which will maintain the scle-

 

ral lake, a 10-0 nylon suture is preplaced in the scleral

 

bed. This suture is passed full thickness through the

 

remaining sclera but remains in the suprachoroidal

 

space. Collagen implants have also been shown to

 

reduce inflammation adjacent to the scleral flap and bleb

 

by activating collagenase. The collagen implant is placed

 

in a centripetal orientation (c) and then tied into place

 

(d). Some surgeons will also leave the implant longer

 

than the flap such that the posterior extent of the implant

 

protrudes beyond the posterior edge of the flap, thereby

 

further promoting the drainage of aqueous into the sub-

(e)

conjunctival space (e).

288 Atlas of glaucoma

(a)

(b)

Figure 18.15 DS – Closure of the superficial flap. (a,b) The superficial flap is then closed loosely using two 10-0 nylon sutures to promote bleb formation. Note the gap between the flap and adjacent sclera indicating the relative tension of the sutures (a).

Figure 18.16 VC – Closure of the superficial flap. The superficial flap is then reflected back into place and sewn tightly. Finally, high-viscosity viscoelastic is injected underneath the flap to maintain the scleral lake. High-viscosity viscoelastics have been shown to prevent fibrinogen migration, thus minimizing scar formation, which could obliterate the scleral lake over time.

a 27-gauge needle inserted into the anterior chamber at the limbus.

Review of literature

Early NPGS studies, primarily evaluating VC or DS without an implant, suggested lesser efficacy in lowering IOP as compared to MMC trabeculectomy. However, refinements to technique such as spacemaintaining devices, antimetabolite use, and postoperative modulation with Nd:YAG goniopuncture, have resulted in comparable if not superior IOP lowering while maintaining an excellent safety profile, particularly in DS with collagen implant. The IOP-lowering efficacy of VC is probably not as great as in DS with an implant. In the review of current

Figure 18.17 Conjunctival closure. The conjunctival flap is closed in the usual fashion for both procedures. The authors prefer a 10-0 Vicryl suture on a vascular needle, passed in horizontal mattress fashion across the extent of the incision.

literature, it is worth noting that some studies have considered postoperative laser goniopuncture a failure, citing that this effectively converts NPGS into a penetrating procedure. Proponents of NPGS have countered that the need for post-operative modulation of flow with goniopuncture is no different from the need to perform argon suture lysis which, although effectively converting a guarded procedure to full thickness, is not associated with the same risks as full-thickness procedures. Currently, longterm data on NPGS are evolving which suggest that altered bleb morphology achieved with NPGS (shallow and diffuse in DS, and non-existent in VC) reduces the risk for late leakage, blebitis and endophthalmitis. A review of major studies evaluating NPGS is presented in Tables 18.5 and 18.6.

Table 18.5 Outcomes of Non Penetrating Glaucoma Surgery and Trabeculectomy

 

Authors

Year

Design

Surgery

Adjunctive

GP (%

n

Follow

Mean

Mean

Mean #

Mean #

% complete

Definition

 

 

 

 

 

Antimetabolite

required)

(eyes)

up

preop

postop

preop

postop

success

of success

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IOP

IOP

medications medications

(qualified)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gimbel et al

1999

NR

VC + Phaco

No

No

55

6

 

20

15

NR

NR

NR

 

NR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mermoud et al

1999

Prospective,

DSCI

POp 5FU

Yes (23) NA

44

14

6

27 4

14 4

2.2 0.8

0.36 0.7

69

(95)

< 21

 

non randomized

Trab

POp 5FU

44

16

8

25 7

12 4

NR

0.75 1.1

57

(95)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stegmann et al

1999

Prospective

VC

No

No

214

35

 

47 13

17 8

0

0.17

82.7 (89)

22

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Drüsedau et al

2000

NR

VC

No

No

59

12

 

28 7

19 8

2.4 0.8

0.7 0.7

36

(79)

< 21

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

El Sayyad et al

2000

Prospective,

Trab

POp 5FU

NA

39

12

 

28 5

14 5

2.6 0.6

0.3 0.5

85

(95)

21

 

randomized

DS

POp 5FU

Yes (10)

39

12

 

28 6

16 4

2.4 0.7

0.3 0.4

79

(92)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jonescu-Cuypers

2001

Prospective,

VC Trab

No

No

10

6

 

31 7

18 5

NR

NR

0

(NR)

< 20

 

et al

randomized

NA

10

6

 

28 6

15 3

50

(NR)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hamel et al

2001

Prospective,

DSCI

POp 5FU

Yes (71)

21

44

17

26 6

11 6

2.3 0.9

0.9 0.9

38

(81)

< 21

 

non randomized

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sunaric-Mégevand

2001

Prospective

VC

No

Yes (9)

67

23

9

24 7

14 3

NR

1.2

52

(36)

< 20

 

et al

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amrebsin et al

2002

Prospective,

Trab

POp 5FU

NA

25

24

 

29 9

13 5

1.8 1.1

1.2 1.1

45

(90)

< 21

 

non randomized

DSCI

POp 5FU

Yes (45)

25

24

 

23 6

14 5

2.5 0.8

1.0 1.0

40

(90)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prospective,

DS

POp 5FU

No

40

36

 

26 4

19 3

3.2 0.8

1.0 1.0

43

(73)

 

 

Kozobolis et al

2002

IOp MMC+POp

 

< 21

 

randomized

DS

No

40

36

 

28 5

16 2

3.0 0.6

0.6 0.7

50

(90)

 

 

 

5FU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lüke et al

2002

Prospective,

Trab

No

NA

30

12

 

27 7

15 4

2.5 1.1

0.6 1.0

57

(87)

< 22

 

randomized

VC

No

No

30

12

 

27 7

17 5

2.9 0.9

1.1 1.2

30

(57)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prospective,

VC

POp 5FU

No

25

12

 

24.2

20

 

 

64

(NR)

 

 

O’Brart et al

2002

IOp MMC or 5FU

 

NR

NR

< 21

 

randomized

Trab

NA

25

12

 

24

13

100

(NR)

 

 

 

 

 

+ POp FU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tanito et al

2002

Prospective,

VC+Phaco

No

No

57

6

 

21 3

16 3

1.7 0.1

0.2 0.1

95

 

< 21

 

retrospective

Trab+Phaco

No

NA

57

6

 

21 3

16 4

1.6 0.1

0.4 0.1

98

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wishart et al

2002

Prospective

VC VC+Phaco No

No

10

36

 

25 6

16 4

2.4 0.8

0.1

93

(100)

< 21

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ates et al

2003

Prospective

DSTF

No

Yes (12)

25

16

4

26 4

17 4

2.2 0.8

0.9 0.9

39

(83)

< 21

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

289 surgery penetrating-Non

Table 18.5 (Continued)

 

Authors

Year

Design

Surgery

Adjunctive

GP (%

n

Follow

Mean

Mean

Mean #

 

Mean #

% complete

Definition

 

 

 

 

 

 

Antimetabolite

required)

(eyes)

up

preop

postop

preop

 

postop

success

of

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IOP

 

IOP

medications

medications

(qualified)

success

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Carassa et al

2003

Prospective,

Trab

POp 5FU

NA

25

24

 

23

 

14

3.1 0.8

 

NR

 

80

(NR)

< 22

 

 

randomized

VC

No

No

24

24

 

25

 

16

3.1 0.7

 

 

76

(NR)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kobayashi et al

2003

Prospective,

Trab

IOp MMC

NA

25

12

 

25

 

3

13 4

3.1 0.3

 

0.4 0.9

0.7

88

(96)

< 20

 

 

randomized

VC

No

Yes (56)

25

2

 

25

 

2

17 2

3.2 0.2

 

0.9

 

60

(92)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lüke et al

2003

Prospective,

VC

No

No

20

12

 

27

 

6

17 6

3.0 1.1

 

0.7 0.1

0.6

40

(85)

< 22

 

 

randomized

VCSK

No

No

20

12

 

26

 

3

17 3

2.8 1.1

 

1.0

 

40

(85)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shaarawy et al

2003

Prospective,

VC

POp 5FU

Yes (37)

57

34 11

25

 

4

13 4

NR

 

NR

 

60

(90)

21

 

 

non randomized

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DS

No

No

52

36 12

28

 

5

17 v 6

2.3 0.7

 

0.2

 

68 (NR)

 

 

 

Wishart et al

2003

Prospective,

DS+Phaco

No

No

35

35 12

24

 

7

15 3

2.0 0.9

 

0.1

 

96 (NR)

21

 

 

non randomized

VC

No

No

27

36 18

26

 

9

17 3

1.4 0.9

 

0.1

 

90 (NR)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VC+Phaco

No

No

78

32 12

24

 

5

17 3

2.2 0.8

 

0.1

 

94 (NR)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cillino et al

2004

Prospective,

Trab

No

NA

33

24

 

32.1

 

2.7

14 1

2.3 0.1

 

0.7 0.2

0.6

56

(89)

21

 

 

randomized

DS

No

17

24

 

30.2

 

2.9

18 1

2.7 0.2

 

0.2

 

53

(77)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Neudorfer et al

2004

Prospective,

DSCI

No

No

13

24

 

27

 

3

18 3

2.9 0.6

 

1.8 0.9

2.0 NR

 

NR

 

randomized

DSCI

IOp MMC

13

24

 

32

 

6

16 6

3.7 0.6

 

1.5

 

NR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Park et al

2004

Prospective

VC+Phaco

No

No

10

18

6

20 3

16 2

14 0.9

 

0.0 0.5

61

(85)

< 21

 

 

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ravinet et al

2004

Prospective,

DS

POp MMC

Yes (36) Yes

11

24

 

24

 

8

12 4

2.2 1.0

0.2 0.4

0.4

91

(100)

21

 

 

randomized

DSTF

POp MMC

(64)

11

24

 

28 14

13 3

2.5 0.9

 

0.7

 

100(100)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shaarawy et al

2004

Prospective

DSCI

POp 5FU

Yes (51)

10

64

 

27

 

8

12 3

2.3 0.7

 

0.5 0.7

57

(91)

< 21

 

 

5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yalvac et al

2004

Prospective,

VC

No

No

25

36

 

36

 

8

16 7

3.1 0.4

1.5 0.3

0.5

35

(79)

< 21

 

 

randomized

Trab

NA

25

36

 

38

 

9

18 5

3.0 0.5

 

0.1

 

55

(73)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yarangümeli et al

2004

Prospective,

Trab

No

NA

22

18

6

39 12

10 4

3.6 0.5

0.8 1.2

1.3

64

(95)

18

 

 

randomized

VC

Yes (5)

22

17

6

39 13

13 4

3.6 0.6

 

1.2

 

59

(91)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DSSK

POp 5FU

Yes (81) Yes

19

12

 

 

25

 

16

2.0

 

 

 

67

(NR)

 

 

 

Anand et al

2005

Restropsective

IOp MMC+POp

 

 

 

 

NR

 

< 18

 

 

DSSK

(45)

52

12

 

26

 

13

2.3

 

 

86

(NR)

 

 

 

 

 

5FU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cillino et al

2005

Prospective,

Trab

IOp MMC

NA

21

12

 

28

 

6

16 4

NR

 

NR

 

71

(100)

21

 

 

randomized

DS

IOp MMC

Yes (22)

19

12

 

30

 

6

15 4

 

 

79

(100)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

glaucoma of Atlas 290

 

Table 18.5

(Continued)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Authors

Year

Design

Surgery

Adjunctive

GP (%

n

Follow

Mean

Mean

Mean #

Mean #

% complete

Definition

 

 

 

 

 

Antimetabolite

required) (eyes)

up

preop

postop

preop

postop

success

of success

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IOP

IOP

medications

medications

(qualified)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Devloo et al

2005

Retrospective

DS

No

Yes (30)

69

16 9

24 6

16

6

1.8 0.6

0.8 0.8 0.5

41

(82)

< 21

 

DSASI

No

Yes (50)

24

15 6

26 7

16

6

1.8 0.9

0.7

54

(75)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funnell et al

2005

Retrospective

Trab+Phaco

IOp MMC+POp 5FU IOp NA

38

19 8

20

12

 

NRs

NR

77 (NR)

< 19

 

DS+Phaco

MMC+POp 5FU

Yes (52)

59

16 9

21

11

 

78 (NR)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Khairy et al

2006

Prospective,

DS

POp 5FU

Yes (5)

43

28 8

25 6

19

5

2.1 0.9

0.7 1.1

 

NR

NR

 

non randomized

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lachkar et al

2004

Retrospective

DS

POp 5FU

Yes (47)

25

72

25 6

16

4

2.0 0.6

0.9 0.9

66

(80)

< 21

 

8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shaarawy and

2005

Prospective,

DS

POp 5FU

Yes (46)

13

48

24 7

16

3

2.2

1.1

38

(69)

< 21

 

Mermoud

randomized

DSCI

POp 5FU

Yes (46)

13

48

25 6

10

4

2.2

0.4

69

(100)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wevill et al

2005

Prospective

DSCI1

POp MMC

Yes (22)

23

36 20

26 9

17

2

NR

NR

77

(100)

21

DS: deep sclerectomy, DSCI: deep sclerectomy with collagen implant, VC: viscocanalostomy, Trab: trabeculectomy, Phaco: phacoemulsification, DSASI: deep sclerectomy with autologous scleral implant, DSSK: Deep sclerectomy with SKGEL implant, DSTF: Deep scleretomy with T-Flux implant, POp: Postoperative, IOp: Intraoperative, 5FU: 5-fluorouracil, GP: goniopuncture, NR: not reported, NA: not applicable.

1 A 1-0 chromic suture was used as a collagen implant.

surgery penetrating-Non

291

Соседние файлы в папке Английские материалы