Glaucoma drainage devices for the treatment of post penetrating keratoplasty glaucoma

Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: To investigate the effectiveness and safety of glaucoma drainage deviges in IOP control for the treatment of post penetrating keratoplasty glaucoma Materials and Methods: Thirty four patients with post penetrating keratoplasty glaucoma who underwent drainage deviges for the treatment of post penetrating keratoplasty glaucoma were retrospectively evaluated.

📊

Key Findings & Data:As implant, molteno tube was used in 24 patients and AGV was used in 10 patients.

💡

Conclusion & Impact:However, graft failure is important risk factor for these patients.

🔬Design:Research Article

📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample

⚙️Variables:Greft yaşayabilirliği · Glokom · Keratoplasti

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the effectiveness and safety of glaucoma drainage deviges in IOP control for the treatment of post penetrating keratoplasty glaucoma Materials and Methods: Thirty four patients with post penetrating keratoplasty glaucoma who underwent drainage deviges for the treatment of post penetrating keratoplasty glaucoma were retrospectively evaluated. As implant, molteno tube was used in 24 patients and AGV was used in 10 patients. During implantation procedure, the grafts were clear in 22 patients and remaining 12 grafts were opaque. Results: The mean follow-up time was 23.2 months. The cumulative success rate in IOP control was 85.2% at 1. year, 65.3% at 3. year and the cumulative graft survival rate was 77.2% at 1. year and 74.1% at 2. year and 59% at 3. year, respectively. Graft failure was observed in 9 (40.9%) patients postoperatively. Conclusion: Glaucoma drainage devices were successful in IOP control for the treatment of glaucoma. However, graft failure is important risk factor for these patients.

Özet

Amaç: Penetran keratoplasti sonrası glokom tedavisinde glokom drenaj implantlarının göz içi basınç kontrolündeki etkinliğini ve güvenirliğini araştırmak. Gereç ve Yöntem: Penetran keratoplasti sonrası glokom tedavisinde glokom drenaj implantı yapılan 34 olgudaki sonuçlar geriye dönük olarak incelendi. İmplant olarak 24 olguda Molteno tüp, 10 olguda Ahmed glokom valfi uygulandı. Glokom drenaj implant cerrahisi sırasında 22 olguda greft saydam, 12 olguda ise opaktı. Bulgular: Olgular ortalama 23.2 ay süre ile takip edildi. Göz içi basıncının kontrolünde kümülatif başarı 1.yılda %85.2, 3.yılda %65.3, greft yaşam oranı ise 1.yılda %77.2, 2. yılda %74.1 ve 3.yılda %59.0 olarak tespit edildi. Ameliyat sonrası 9 (%40.9 ) olguda greft yetmezliği meydana geldi. Sonuç: Penetran keratoplasti sonrası glokom tedavisinde glokom drenaj implantları göz içi basıncını kontrol etmede başarılı bulunmuştur. Ancak bu olgularda greft yetmezliğinin önemli oranda risk oluşturduğu gözlenmiştir.

Keywords

Greft yaşayabilirliği Glokom Keratoplasti penetran Geriyedönük çalışma Göz içi basınç Graft Survival Glaucoma Keratoplasty Penetrating Retrospective Studies Intraocular Pressure

🔖

Cite This Article

KURNAZ, E., KUBALOĞLU, A., KOYTAK, A., COŞKUN, E., YILMAZ, Y., ÖZERTÜRK, Y. (2007). Glaucoma drainage devices for the treatment of post penetrating keratoplasty glaucoma. Glokom Katarakt, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 1, 51–54. https://ajindex.com/articles/226663

References (12)

Chien AM, Schmidt CM, Cohen EJ, et al.: Glaucoma in the immediate postoperative period after penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthal mol. 1993;115:711-714. Foulks GN.: Glaucoma associated with penetrating keratoplasty. Ophthalmology. 1987;94:871-874.
Goldberg DB, Schanzlin DJ, Brown SI.: Incidence of increased intra ocular pressure after keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 1981,92:372- 377. Karesh JW, Nirankari VS.: Factor associated with glaucoma after pe netrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 1983;96:160-164.
Kirkness CM, Moshegov C: Post-keratoplasty glaucoma. Eye. 1988;2:19-26.
Wilson SE, Kaufman HE.: Graft failure after penetrating keratoplasty. Surv Ophthalmol. 1990;34:325-356.
Schanzlin DJ, Robin JB, Gomez DS, et al.: Results of penetrating ke ratoplasty for aphakic and pseudophakic bullous keratopathy. Am J Ophthalmol. 1984;98:302-312.
Gilvarry AME, Kirkness CM, Steel ADM, et al.: The management of post-keratoplasty glaucoma by trabeculectomy. Eye. 1989;3:713- 718. Ficker LA, Kirkness CM, Steel ADM, eta I.: Intraocular surgery following penetrating keratoplasty: the risks and advantages. Eye. 1990;4:693- 697. Beebe WE.: Management of glaucoma in penetrating keratoplasty patients. Refract Cornea I Surgery. 1991;7:67-69.
Kirkness CM, Ling Y, Rice NS.: The use of silicone drainage tubing to control post-keratoplasty glaucoma. Eye. 1988;2:583-590.
Irvine AR, Kaufman HE.: Intraocular pressure following penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 1969;68:835-844.
McDonnell PJ, Robin JB, Schanzlin DJ, et al.: Molteno implant for control of glaucoma in eyes after penetrating keratoplasty. Ophthal mology. 1988;95:364-369.
Olson RJ, Kaufman HE.: A mathematical description of causative fa ctors and prevention of elevated intraocular pressure after keratop lasty. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1977,16:1085-1092.
Campbell DG, Grant WM.: Trabecular deformation and reduction of outflow facility due to cataract and penetrating keratoplasty sutures. ARVO Abstracts. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1977.16(Suppl).126. Goldberg DB, Schanzling DJ, Brown SI.: Incidence of increased intra ocular pressure after keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 1981;92:372- 377. Hodkin MJ, Goldblatt WS, Burgoyne CF, et al.: Early clinical expe rience with the Baerveldt implant in complicated glaucomas. Am J Ophthalmol. 1995,12:32-40. Ayyala RS.: Penetrating keratoplasty and glaucoma. Surv Ophthal mol. 2000;45:91-105.
Coleman AL, Mondino BJ, Wilson MR, et al.: Clinical experience with the Ahmed G