4.7 Article

Risk factors for Baerveldt glaucoma drainage implantation for uveitic glaucoma

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-29244-1

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined the surgical efficacy, complications, and risk factors of Baerveldt glaucoma drainage device (BGD) implantation in 62 eyes with Uveitic glaucoma (UG). The results showed significant reduction in intraocular pressure (IOP) and decrease in glaucoma medications after the surgery. However, the presence of systemic treatment and the lens status should be taken into consideration.
Uveitic glaucoma (UG) is sometimes intractable, including intricate interaction between intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation associated with inflammation and side effects of steroids. Based on the Tube Versus Trabeculectomy study in refractory glaucoma results in 2012, tube shunt surgeries have been performed for UG, but few reports have focused on UG. We retrospectively examined the surgical efficacy, complications, and risk factors in 62 eyes with UG that underwent Baerveldt glaucoma drainage device (BGD) implantation at Kumamoto University. The IOPs significantly dropped, and the mean number of glaucoma medications was reduced by more than two. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were presented under 2 conditions: an IOP reduction of 20% and 6 <= IOP <= 18 mmHg (criterion A) or 6 <= IOP <= 15 mmHg (criterion B). In criterion A, the median survival times (MST) were 124 days (complete) and 997 days (qualified). In criterion B, the MST was 129 days (complete) and 867 days (qualified). The Cox hazard proportional model found that the hazard ratio was 0.170 for a history of cataract surgery (95% CI 0.0303-0.950) and 8.669 for systemic immunosuppressive therapy (95% CI 1.810-41.51). BGD implantation is effective for treating UG, but the presence of systemic treatment and the lens status should be considered.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available