Standardization of approaches to repeat glaucoma surgery
https://doi.org/10.53432/2078-4104-2026-25-2-18-29
Abstract
Recurrence of sustained intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation occurs in 15% to 35% of cases after glaucoma surgery (GS). The choice of optimal management strategy and timing for repeat GS remains an important and insufficiently studied issue.
PURPOSE. To study the range of opinions and clinical approaches among ophthalmologists in Russia regarding repeat glaucoma surgery in patients with primary openangle glaucoma (POAG).
METHODS. This study consisted of a survey conducted among 606 ophthalmologists from various regions of Russia. Among them, 432 (71%) worked in outpatient clinics, 96 (16%) in hospitals, and 78 (13%) combined both settings. The study used descriptive statistics and comparison of proportions between groups with assessment of statistical significance (p-values).
RESULTS. The vast majority of respondents (77.2% of outpatient physicians and 81.7% of hospital physicians) regularly (weekly, monthly, or quarterly) encounter patients requiring repeat GS.
Significant differences in clinical approaches were identified: 46.9% of hospital surgeons were ready to refer patients for repeat surgery within 1.5 to 6 months, whereas only 33.1% of outpatient physicians supported this strategy (p=0.005). In cases of disease destabilization, 46.9% of hospital physicians favor the "prefer repeat surgery" approach, while outpatient physicians more often (42.1%) opted for "prefer prolonged medical therapy" (p=0.0005). While 98.95% of hospital doctors consider stabilization without therapy as a criterion for complete success of antiglaucoma surgery, 6.2% to 8.9% of physicians from other groups also regarded stabilization with hypotensive medications as a successful outcome.
CONCLUSION. The survey results revealed significant discrepancies between outpatient and hospital ophthalmologists in the management of patients with failed initial GS, particularly regarding the timing of repeat surgery and the choice between surgical and medical strategies. These findings highlight the absence of unified standards and underscore the need for the development of standardized clinical guidelines for managing this complex patient population to improve long-term functional outcomes.
About the Authors
A. V. KuroyedovRussian Federation
Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Head of the Academic Department of Ophthalmology, Head of Ophthalmology Сenter
1 Ostrovityanov St., Moscow, 117997
8A Bolshaya Olenya St., Moscow, 107014
A. Yu. Brezhnev
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor at the Academic Department of Ophthalmology
3 Karla Marksa St., Kursk, 305041
E. V. Berdnikova
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor at the Academic Department of Ophthalmology
64 Vorovskogo St., Chelyabinsk, 454092
A. A. Vitkov
Russian Federation
researcher at the Department of Glaucoma
11A Rossolimo St., Moscow, 1190214
D. A. Dorofeev
Russian Federation
senior researcher at the Department of Glaucoma, ophthalmologist
11A Rossolimo St., Moscow, 1190214
8a MOPRa Sq., Chelyabinsk, 454090
V. V. Gorodnichii
Russian Federation
ophthalmologist
8A Bolshaya Olenya St., Moscow, 107014
E. V. Karlova
Russian Federation
Dr. Sci. (Med.), Deputy Chief Physician
158 Novo-Sadovaya St., Samara, 443068
References
1. Nesterov A.P. Pathogenesis and problems of pathogenetic treatment of glaucoma. RMJ Clinical Ophthalmology 2003; 4(2):47-48.
2. Tyamaeva L. Effective Diagnosis of Glaucoma: Problems and Solutions. Ophthalmological News 2008; 1(3):91-93.
3. Alekseev I.B., Soshina M.M., Belskaya K.I., Ailarova A.K., Kopchenova Yu.G., Koroleva I.A., Isaev A.R. Evaluation of the Hypertensive Effectiveness of Antiglaucoma Surgery: A Retrospective Analysis. Clinical Ophthalmology 2020; 20(1):8-14. https://doi.org/10.32364/2311-7729-2020-20-1-8-14.
4. Dorofeev D.A., Baryshnikova D.A., Kirilik E.V. et al. An effective model of dispensary and dynamic monitoring of patients with glaucoma. National Journal of Glaucoma. 2022; 21(1):71-78. https://doi.org/10.53432/2078-4104-2022-21-1-71-78
5. Simakova I.L., Kulikov A.N., Kharakozov A.S. et al. A new approach to the study of the pathogenesis of normal-pressure glaucoma. Izvestiya of the Russian Military Medical Academy 2021; 40(S1-1):149-154.
6. Solodovnikova N.G., Ilyina S.N., Krinets Zh.M., et al. The effectiveness of hypotensive therapy in primary open-angle glaucoma. Actual Problems of Medicine 2015; 7:213-135.
7. Malishevskaya O.I., Knysh O.I., Dolgova I. G., et al. Assessment of the quality of life in patients with glaucoma using various options of hypotensive therapy. Medical Science and Education of the Urals 2011; 12(2(66)):207-209.
8. Sihota R., Angmo D. et al. Evaluating the long-term efficacy of shortduration 0.1 mg/ml and 0.2 mg/ml MMC in primary trabeculectomy for primary adult glaucoma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2015; 253(7):1153-1159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-3028-9
9. Chuprov A.D., Kuvaitseva Yu.S. Surgical Treatment of a Patient with Advanced Refractory Glaucoma. Bulletin of the Pirogov National Medical and Surgical Center 2022; 17(3):128-130. https://doi.org/10.25881/20728255_2022_17_3_128
10. Smneok A.E., Vasilyev R.A., Karlova E.V. et al. Comparative assessment of early postoperative results of non-penetrating equatorial sclerotomy with organ-preserving techniques in terminal glaucoma. Ophthalmosurgery 2011; 2:34-37.
11. Zakharova I.A., Makhmutov V.Yu., Avdeev R.V., et al. Methods of scarring prevention in surgical treatment of glaucoma. Bulletin of Experimental and Clinical Surgery 2016; 9(1):81-88.
12. Baranov I.Ya., Shiryaev I.V., Perevedentseva L.A. Transcorneal activation of the previous hypotensive surgery zone. Vestnik OUG 2014; 12:38-41.
13. Alekseev V.N., Koroyev O.A., Koroyev A.O. Sequential operations for glaucoma and cataract in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. Kuban Scientific Medical Bulletin 2011; 16-19.
14. Cheng J.Wei., Xi G.L., Wei R.L., Cai J.P., Li Y. Efficacy, and tolerability of nonpenetrating glaucoma surgery augmented with mitomycin C in treatment of open-angle glaucoma: a meta-analysis. Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology 2009; 44(1):76-82. https://doi.org/10.3129/i08-165
15. Cheng J.W., Cheng S.W., Cai J.P., Li Y., Wei R.L. Systematic overview of the efficacy of nonpenetrating glaucoma surgery in the treatment of open angle glaucoma. Medical Science Monitor 2011; 17(7):RA155- 163. https://doi.org/10.12659/msm.881840
16. Suominen S., Harju M., Kurvinen L., Vesti E. Deep sclerectomy in normal-tension glaucoma with and without mitomycin-c. Acta Ophthalmologica 2014; 92(7):701-706.
17. Gedde S.J., Feuer W.J., Lim K.S., Barton K., Goyal S., Ahmed I.I.K. et al. Treatment Outcomes in the Primary Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study after 3 Years of Follow-up. Ophthalmology 2020; 127(3):333- 345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2019.10.002
18. Gedde S.J., Feuer W.J., Shi W., Lim K.S., Barton K., Goyal S. et al. Treatment Outcomes in the Primary Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study after 1 Year of Follow-up. Ophthalmology 2018; 125(5):650- 663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.02.003
19. Harju M., Suominen S. et al. Long-term results of deep sclerectomy in normal-tension glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmologica 2018; 96(2): 154-160. https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.13529
20. Avdeev R.V., Aleksandrov A.S., Basinsky A.S., Blum E.A., Brezhnev A.Yu., Volkov E.N. et al. Clinical multicenter study of the effectiveness of sinusotrabeculectomy. Glaucoma Journal of the Research Institute of GB RAMS 2013; 2:53-60.
Review
For citations:
Kuroyedov A.V., Brezhnev A.Yu., Berdnikova E.V., Vitkov A.A., Dorofeev D.A., Gorodnichii V.V., Karlova E.V. Standardization of approaches to repeat glaucoma surgery. National Journal glaucoma. 2026;25(2):18-29. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.53432/2078-4104-2026-25-2-18-29
JATS XML

















