4.6 Article

Long-term Complications Associated with Glaucoma Drainage Devices and Boston Keratoprosthesis

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 152, Issue 2, Pages 209-218

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2011.01.034

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PURPOSE: To evaluate long-term complications related to glaucoma drainage devices in patients undergoing Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis surgery. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: All patients who underwent Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis surgery at the University of California, Davis, between 2004 and 2010 were included. Preoperative and postoperative data were reviewed. Twenty-five eyes with glaucoma drainage devices were highlighted. Visual acuity and postoperative complications were tracked at postoperative months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 and at annual intervals thereafter. RESULTS: Forty eyes of 35 patients were evaluated with an average follow-up of 33.6 months. Conjunctival breakdown occurred in association with 10 glaucoma drainage device implants in 9 eyes. Eleven eyes had glaucoma drainage devices placed before keratoprosthesis surgery, 3 eyes underwent glaucoma drainage device placement at the time of surgery, and 2 eyes had a glaucoma drainage device placed after surgery. All but one of the eroded glaucoma drainage devices were placed before surgery. Associated complications included endophthalmitis, hypotony, and keratoprosthesis extrusion, with 6 glaucoma drainage devices requiring removal. Long-term beset-corrected visual acuity was maintained better in eyes in which glaucoma drainage device erosions did not develop. CONCLUSIONS: One of the main challenges with keratoprosthesis surgery is treating concurrent glaucoma. Glaucoma drainage devices have been advocated as a way to address this long-term complication, but this series suggests that glaucoma drainage device-related complications can cause significant vision loss. (Am J Ophthalmol 2011;152:209-218. (C) 2011 by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available