Risks in the surgical treatment of far-advanced glaucoma in the only seeing eye
M. A. Frolov,
Yu. G. Kopchenova,
M. P. Tolstykh,
A. M. Frolov,
F. T Dulani,
L. V. Tebueva,
A. R. Isaev https://doi.org/10.53432/2078-4104-2023-22-3-70-78
Abstract
This review summarizes the results of surgical treatment of faradvanced stage glaucoma in the only seeing eye. A literature search performed in the PubMed search engine and aimed at finding publications reporting the clinical outcomes of treatment in patients with glaucoma in the only seeing eye did yield sufficient data related to the topic. A comprehensive analysis of the available data was performed with an emphasis on the choice of treatment tactics and postoperative results at various times following a surgery. Several studies allowed to perform a comparison of the clinical advantages and costeffectiveness of medical treatment versus surgery for advanced glaucoma, as well as to assess potential risks and adverse outcomes such as glaucoma progression, postoperative scarring, hypotension and other complications. The results presented in this review suggest that common success criteria can provide uniformity in academic studies, but in daily clinical practice each glaucoma specialist must make a patientspecific decision in favor of either of these methods of treatment in order to guarantee an optimal result, both for the doctor and, of course, for the patient.
About the Authors
M. A. Frolov
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Head of the Academic Department of Eye Diseases
6 Miklukho-Maclaya St., Moscow, 117198
Yu. G. Kopchenova
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia
Moscow City Clinical Hospital No. 52
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Assistant Professor at the Academic Department of Eye Diseases
Head of the Department of Ophthalmology
6 Miklukho-Maclaya St., Moscow, 117198
3 Pekhotnaya St., Moscow, 132182
M. P. Tolstykh
A.I. Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Head of the Academic Department of Human Anatomy
of the Faculty of Medicine
20/1 Delegatskaya St., Moscow, 127479
A. M. Frolov
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor at the Academic Department of Eye Diseases
6 Miklukho-Maclaya St., Moscow, 117198
F. T Dulani
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
clinical resident at the Academic Department of Eye Diseases
6 Miklukho-Maclaya St., Moscow, 117198
L. V. Tebueva
Moscow City Clinical Hospital No. 52
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
ophthalmologist at the Department of Ophthalmology
3 Pekhotnaya St., Moscow, 132182
A. R. Isaev
Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
ophthalmologist, postgraduate student at the Academic Department of Ophthalmology
2/1 Barricadnaya St., Moscow, 123995
References
1. Egorov E.A., Botabekova T.K., Veselovskaya Z.F. et al. Meznatsionalnoe rukovodstvo po glaukome [International guide to glaucoma]. Volume 2. Moscow, Ophthalmology Publishing House, 2016. 184 p.
2. Eroshevskaya E.B. Intraocular correction of aphakia in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. Dissertation of Doct. Med. Sci. Samara, 1997. 240 p.
3. Dolzhych G.I., Ven Lakhdar Atef. Clinical and functional substantiation of one-stage visor sinus trabeculectomy with cataract extraction and IOL implantation. Materials of all-Russian conference “Glaucoma at the turn of the millennium: Results and prospects” Moscow, 1999. pp. 276-277.
4. Ioshin I.E., Tolchinskaya A.I., Madyarova D.A. Surgical treatment of complicated cataract in monocular patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. Glaucoma 2002; 1:24.
5. Korchuganova E.A. Limbosclerectomy with valvular drainage of the supraciliary space — a new operation in the treatment of refractory glaucoma. Dissertation of Cand. Med. Sci. Moscow, 2001.
6. Erichev V.P. Refractory glaucoma: features of treatment. Vestnik oftal’mologii 2000; 116(5):8-10.
7. Erichev V.P. Surgical and ultrasound treatment of the main forms of refractory glaucoma. Dissertation of Doct. Med. Sci. Moscow, 1998.
8. Abdelghany AA, Sallam MA, Ellabban AA. Assessment of Ganglion Cell Complex and Peripapillary Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Changes following Cataract Surgery in Patients with Pseudoexfoliation Glaucoma. J Ophthalmol 2019; 2019:8162825. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8162825
9. El-Ashry M, Appaswamy S, Deokule S, Pagliarini S. The effect of phacoemulsification cataract surgery on the measurement of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness using optical coherence tomography. Curr Eye Res 2006; 31(5):409-413. https://doi.org/10.1080/02713680600646882
10. Jha B, Sharma R, Vanathi M, Agarwal T, Sidhu T, Tomar A, Dada T. Effect of phacoemulsification on measurement of retinal nerve fiber layer and optic nerve head parameters using spectral-domain-optical coherence tomography. Oman J Ophthalmol 2017; 10(2):91-95. https://doi.org/10.4103/ojo.OJO_93_2016.
11. Kolotkova A.I. Dystrophic changes in the iris, pupil width and outflow of aqueous fluid. Vestnik oftal’mologii 1971; 87(6):11-14.
12. Krasnov M.M. Mikrohirurgiya glaukom [Microsurgery of glaucoma]. 2nd ed. Moscow, Medicine Publ., 1980. 248 p.
13. Sayfulina M.G. On the significance of the state of the anterior chamber angle and its depth in the diagnosis of primary glaucoma. Vestnik oftal’mologii 1967; 83(2):28-31.
14. Starchak M.I. Age features of eye hydrodynamics. Oftal’mologicheskiy zhurnal 1972; 1:7-13.
15. Volkov V.V., Brzhevsky V.V., Ushakov N.A. Oftal’mohirurgiya s ispolzovaniem polimerov [Ophthalmosurgery with using polymers]. St. Petersburg: Hippocrates Publ., 2003. 415 p.
16. Ashburn FS, Netland PA. The Evolution of Glaucoma Drainage Implants. J Ophthalmic Vis Res 2018; 13(4):498-500. https://doi.org/10.4103/jovr.jovr_26_18
17. Greve EL, Wagemans MJ. Extracapsular cataract extraction in primary open angle glaucoma. In: Greve EL, ed. Surgical management of coexisting glaucoma and cataract. Amsterdam, Kugler Publications, 1987: 51-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(88)33112-X
18. Greve EL. Primary angle closure glaucoma: extracapsular cataract extraction or filtering procedure? Int Ophthalmol 1988; 12(3):157-162. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00129999
19. Gunning FP, Greve EL. Uncontrolled primary angle closure glaucoma: results of early intercapsular cataract extraction and posterior chamber lens implantation. Int Ophthalmol 1991; 15(4):237-247. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00171026
20. Jimenez-Roman J, Lazcano-Gomez G, Martínez-Baez K, Turati M, Gulías-Cañizo R, Hernández-Zimbrón LF, Ochoa-De la Paz L, Zamora R, Gonzalez-Salinas R. Effect of phacoemulsification on intraocular pressure in patients with primary open angle glaucoma and pseudoexfoliation glaucoma. Int J Ophthalmol 2017; 10(9):1374-1378. https://doi.org/10.18240/ijo.2017.09.07
21. Ștefănescu-Dima AȘ, Tănasie CA, Mercuț MF, Mercuț IM, Ionete M, Mocanu CL. Pseudophakic malignant glaucoma — a case report. Rom J Ophthalmol 2019; 63(3):268-272. https://doi.org/10.22336/rjo.2019.41
22. Malov I.V., Bondareva I.G. Effect of cataract phacoemulsification on eye hydrodynamics in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. Collection of materials of the IV Euro-Asian conference on ophthalmology. Yekaterinburg, 2006. pp. 61-62.
23. Maltsev E.V., Dmitriev S.K., Kovylina I.V. Cataract in patients with pseudoexfoliative syndrome. Ophthalmological journal 2005; 2:49-55.
24. Moshetova L.K., Alekseev I.B., Koshcheeva E.A. Metod hirurgicheskogo lecheniya patsientov s subkompensirovannoi i nekompensirovannoi glaukomoi, ranee pereneshikh fistuliziruischyiu operatsiu. Posobie dlya vrachei [A method of surgical treatment of patients with subcompensated and uncompensated glaucoma who have previously undergone fistulizing surgery. Guidelines for doctors]. Moscow, 2007. pp. 2-3.
25. Araujo SV, Spaeth GL, Roth SM, Starita RJ. A ten-year follow-up on a prospective, randomized trial of postoperative corticosteroids after trabeculectomy. Ophthalmology 1995; 102(12):1753-1759. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0161-6420(95)30797-x.
26. Kwong TQ, Mahroo O, Scoppettuolo E, Ansari E. Outcomes of Trabeculectomy With Transconjunctival Application Versus Subconjunctival Application of Mitomycin C. J Glaucoma 2016; 25(6):467-471. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0000000000000315.
27. De Fendi LI, Arruda GV, Scott IU, Paula JS. Mitomycin C versus 5-fluorouracil as an adjunctive treatment for trabeculectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2013; 41(8): 798-806. https://doi.org/10.1111/ceo.12097
28. Chawla A, Mercieca K, Fenerty C, Jones NP. Outcomes and complications of trabeculectomy enhanced with 5-fluorouracil in adults with glaucoma secondary to uveitis. J Glaucoma 2013; 22(8):663-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e318255dc07
29. Zorab A. Trans ophthal Soc UK 1912; 32, 217.
30. Richards RD. Eye, Ear, Nose Thr. Mthly 1955; 44(8):54.
31. Barsky D, Schimek RA. Evaluation of absorbable gelatin film (gelfilm) in cyclodialysis clefts. I. AMA Arch Ophthalmol 1958; 60(6):10441052. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.1958.00940081064010
32. Stanworth A. Conjunctival fibrosis after filtration operations. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK 1958; 78:43-55; discussion 55-58.
33. Christmann LM, Wilson ME. Motility disturbances after Molteno implants. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 1992; 29(1):44-48. https://doi.org/10.3928/0191-3913-19920101-09
34. Molteno AC. New implant for drainage in glaucoma. Animal trial. Br J Ophthalmol 1969; 53(3):161-168. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.53.3.161
35. Molteno AC. New implant for drainage in glaucoma. Clinical trial. Br J Ophthalmol 1969; 53(9):606-615. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.53.9.606
36. Molteno AC. The use of draining implants in resistant cases of glaucoma. Late results of 110 operations. Trans Ophthalmol Soc NZ 1983; 35:94-97. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp/books/10065_7
37. Krupin T, Podos SM, Becker B, Newkirk JB. Valve implants in filtering surgery. Am J Ophthalmol 1976; 81(2):232-235. https://doi.org/10.18240/ijo.2017.09.07
38. Ahmed AM. Surgical Techniques in Ophthalmology: Glaucoma Surgery. In: Chen TC, editor. Ahmed valve surgery. Vol. 4. New York: Elsevier; 2008. pp. 55-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9394(14)73755-9
39. Quaranta L, Riva I, Floriani IC. Outcomes of using a sutureless bovine pericardial patch graft for Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation. Eur J Ophthalmol 2013; 23(5):738-742. https://doi.org/10.5301/ejo.5000260
40. Zeppa L, Romano MR, Capasso L, Tortori A, Majorana MA, Costagliola C. Sutureless human sclera donor patch graft for Ahmed glaucoma valve. Eur J Ophthalmol 2010; 20(3):546-551. https://doi.org/10.1177/112067211002000302
41. Brasil MV, Rockwood EJ, Smith SD. Comparison of silicone and polypropylene Ahmed Glaucoma Valve implants. J Glaucoma 2007; 16(1): 36-41. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ijg.0000243477.82779.31
42. Hinkle DM, Zurakowski D, Ayyala RS. A comparison of the polypropylene plate Ahmed glaucoma valve to the silicone plate Ahmed glaucoma flexible valve. Eur J Ophthalmol 2007; 17(5):696-701. https://doi.org/10.1177/112067210701700502
43. Ishida K, Netland PA, Costa VP, Shiroma L, Khan B, Ahmed II. Comparison of polypropylene and silicone Ahmed Glaucoma Valves. Ophthalmology 2006; 113(8):1320-1326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.04.020
44. Mackenzie PJ, Schertzer RM, Isbister CM. Comparison of silicone and polypropylene Ahmed glaucoma valves: two-year follow-up. Can J Ophthalmol 2007; 42(2):227-232. https://doi.org/10.3129/can.j.ophthalmol.i07-032
45. Law SK, Nguyen A, Coleman AL, Caprioli J. Comparison of safety and efficacy between silicone and polypropylene Ahmed glaucoma valves in refractory glaucoma. Ophthalmology 2005; 112(9):1514-1520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.04.012
46. Dahan E, Carmichael TR. Implantation of a miniature glaucoma device under a scleral flap. J Glaucoma 2005; 14(2):98-102. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ijg.0000151688.34904.b7
47. Nyska A, Glovinsky Y, Belkin M, Epstein Y. Biocompatibility of the Ex-PRESS miniature glaucoma drainage implant. J Glaucoma 2003; 12(3):275-280. https://doi.org/10.1097/00061198-200306000-00017
48. Wamsley S, Moster MR, Rai S, Alvim HS, Fontanarosa J. Results of the use of the Ex-PRESS miniature glaucoma implant in technically challenging, advanced glaucoma cases: a clinical pilot study. Am J Ophthalmol 2004; 138(6):1049-1051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2004.06.024
49. Frolov M.A., Kumar V., Gonchar P.A., Shepelova I.E. Long-term clinical and functional results of surgical treatment of refractory glaucoma using metal drainage. Natsional’nyi zhurnal glaukoma 2014; 13(4): 57-65. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-019-1027-z
50. Kay JS, Litin BS, Jones MA, Fryczkowski AW, Chvapil M, Herschler J. Delivery of antifibroblast agents as adjuncts to filtration surgery--Part II: Delivery of 5-fluorouracil and bleomycin in a collagen implant: pilot study in the rabbit. Ophthalmic Surg 1986; 17(12):796-801. https://doi.org/10.3928/1542-8877-19861201-07
51. Roberts TV, Francis IC, Lertusumitkul S, Kappagoda MB, Coroneo MT. Primary phacoemulsification for uncontrolled angle-closure glaucoma. J Cataract Refract Surg 2000; 26(7):1012-1016. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0886-3350(00)00358-8
52. Chiou AG, Mermoud A, Underdahl JP, Schnyder CC. An ultrasound biomicroscopic study of eyes after deep sclerectomy with collagen implant. Ophthalmology 1998; 105(4):746-750. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(98)94033-7
53. Mansouri K, Tran HV, Ravinet E, Mermoud A. Comparing deep sclerectomy with collagen implant to the new method of very deep sclerectomy with collagen implant: a single-masked randomized controlled trial. J Glaucoma 2010; 19(1):24-30. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181a2fa46
54. Egorov E.A., Astakhov Yu.S., Erichev V.P. Natsional’noe rukovodstvo po glaukome dlya praktikyuschikh vrachei [National Guidelines for Glaucoma Practitioners]. Moscow, GEOTAR-Media Publ, 2015. 456 p.
55. Murata M. An experimental study of the outflow pathway of the agueous humor after glaucoma surgery. Acta Soc Ophthalmol Jap 1980; 84(9):329-335.
56. Saheb H, Ahmed II. Micro-invasive glaucoma surgery: current perspectives and future directions. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2012; 23(2): 96-104. https://doi.org/10.1097/icu.0b013e32834ff1e7
57. Fokin V.P., Abrosimova E.V., Shchava A.I. Experience with the Healaflow drainage implant in primary open-angle glaucoma surgery. Bulletin of the Volgograd State Medical University 2014; 11(3):73-74.
58. Mudhol R, Bansal R. Cross-linked hyaluronic acid viscoelastic scleral implant in trabeculectomy. Indian J Ophthalmol 2021; 69(5):11351141. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_2462_20.
59. Smirnova I.B. et al. Prevention of scarring of intraocular fluid outflow tracts in patients after surgical treatment of glaucoma. Medical, biological, clinical and social issues of human health and pathology: conference. Ivanovo, 2016. pp. 85-86.
60. Abrosimova E.V., Shchava A.I., Balalin S.V. Experience in the use of the Glautex implant in the surgical treatment of primary open-angle glaucoma. Fyodorov XII All-Russian scientific and practical conference. Moscow, 2014.
61. Slonimsky A.Yu., Alekseev I.B., Dolgiy S.S., Korigodsky A.R. New biodegradable drainage Glautex in the surgical treatment of glaucoma Glaucoma 2012; 4:55-59.
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Frolov M.A., Kopchenova Yu.G., Tolstykh M.P., Frolov A.M., Dulani F.T., Tebueva L.V., Isaev A.R. Risks in the surgical treatment of far-advanced glaucoma in the only seeing eye. National Journal glaucoma. 2023;22(3):70-78. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.53432/2078-4104-2023-22-3-70-78
Views:
313
Email this article 