4.1 Article

Penetrating deep sclerectomy in primary open-angle and pseudoexfoliative glaucoma

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 30, Issue 2, Pages 264-268

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1120672119827768

Keywords

Penetrating deep sclerectomy; primary open-angle glaucoma; pseudoexfoliative glaucoma

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To evaluate the outcomes of a new antiglaucoma surgical method, a modification of the standard deep sclerectomy, the penetrating deep sclerectomy. Participants: Patients with medically uncontrolled primary open-angle glaucoma or pseudoexfoliative glaucoma were prospectively, in a consecutive way, enrolled in this study. Methods: The study was conducted in Glaucoma Unit, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Hospital of Alexandroupolis, Greece, in 29 eyes of 29 patients. In a fornix-based surgical procedure, all eyes underwent the proposed penetrating deep sclerectomy (deep sclerectomy plus trabeculectomy) with the use of mitomycin C applied intraoperatively (0.2 mg/mL for 2 min). The follow-up period was 3 years. Ocular examination was conducted before the operation and at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months postoperatively. Results: The average reduction in intraocular pressure at the end of follow-up was 11.24 (57.88%). The complete success rate (intraocular pressure <= 21 mm Hg without medication) after 3 years was 58.6%. The qualified success rate (intraocular pressure <= 21 mm Hg without or with medication) was 75.86%. Postoperatively, the mean number of medication dropped from 3.75 +/- 0.89 to 0.89 +/- 0.98. Low postoperative complications were recorded. Conclusion: During the 3-year follow-up period, penetrating deep sclerectomy presented very positive outcome. The addition of a controlled perforation of the trabeculo-Descemet's membrane in deep sclerectomy, playing the role of an early goniopuncture, seems to ensure a satisfactory outcome and is not associated with additional complications.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available