Comparison Between the eyeWatch Device and the Ahmed Valve in Refractory Glaucoma.
Journal
Journal of glaucoma
ISSN: 1536-481X
Titre abrégé: J Glaucoma
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9300903
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2020
05 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
26
2
2020
medline:
29
9
2020
entrez:
26
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess the efficacy and safety of a glaucoma procedure to control intraocular pressure (IOP) using the adjustable eyeWatch glaucoma drainage device compared with Ahmed glaucoma valve (AGV) in refractory glaucoma. Monocentric, retrospective, comparative clinical trial. Patients suffering from refractory glaucoma after failed surgeries and requiring a further glaucoma procedure including an aqueous shunt were enrolled in this study. The first group AGV included patients with an AGV. The second group eW-B included patients receiving an eyeWatch used in connection with a Baerveldt glaucoma implant. The primary outcome was the success rate, defined as an IOP≤16 mm Hg and reduction of >20% from baseline, and IOP≥5 mm Hg. Secondary outcomes were mean IOP, number of antiglaucoma medications, visual acuity, number and type of complications. Twenty-one patients were included. The mean follow-up time was 13.2±3.4 months. Mean IOP decreased from 24.8±9.0 mm Hg before surgery to 13.8±3.6 mm Hg at 12 months for group AGV, and 27.3±7.0 to 12.8±2.4 mm Hg for group eW-B, respectively (P<0.05). Mean number of glaucoma medications decreased from 3.0±0.7 before surgery to 0.3±0.7 at last control for group AGV, and 2.9±0.8 before surgery to 0.2±0.4 for group eW-B, respectively (P<0.05). The complete and overall success rates were 50% and 58% for group AGV, and 67% and 89% for group eW-B, respectively. The postoperative adjustability of the eyeWatch is believed to help with getting fewer complications and better IOP management whereas AGV cannot be adjusted postoperatively.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32097256
doi: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001471
pii: 00061198-202005000-00013
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
401-405Références
Quigley HA. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90:262–267.
Congdon N, O’Colmain B, Klaver CC, et al. Causes and prevalence of visual impairment among adults in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004;122:477–485.
Christakis PG, Kalenak JW, Zurakowski D, et al. The Ahmed versus Baerveldt study: one-year treatment outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:2180–2189.
Huang MC, Netland PA, Coleman AL, et al. Intermediate-term clinical experience with the Ahmed Glaucoma Valve implant 1. Am J Ophthalmol. 1999;127:27–33.
Coleman AL, Wilson MR, Tam M, et al. Initial clinical experience with the Ahmed glaucoma valve implant--correction. Am J Ophthalmol. 1995;120:684.
Nguyen QH, Budenz DL, Parrish RK. Complications of Baerveldt glaucoma drainage implants. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116:571–575.
Gedde SJ, Herndon LW, Brandt JD, et al. Postoperative complications in the Tube Versus Trabeculectomy (TVT) study during five years of follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;153:804.e1–814.e1.
Roy S, Villamarin A, Stergiopulos C, et al. Initial clinical results of the eyeWatch: a new adjustable glaucoma drainage device used in refractory glaucoma surgery. J Glaucoma. 2019;28:452–458.
Villamarin A, Roy S, Bigler S, et al. A new adjustable glaucoma drainage device. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55:1848–1852.
Budenz DL, Barton K, Feuer WJ, et al. Treatment outcomes in the Ahmed Baerveldt Comparison Study after 1 year of follow-up. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:443–452.