Cargando…
A Comparison between Tube Surgery, ND:YAG Laser and Diode Laser Cyclophotocoagulation in the Management of Refractory Glaucoma
Purpose. To compare the results of intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction by 3 treatment modalities, (a) glaucoma tube implants, (b) noncontact YAG laser cyclophotocoagulation (cycloYAG), and (c) contact transscleral diode laser cyclophotocoagulation (cyclodiode), in cases of advanced glaucoma refract...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3814063/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24222905 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/371951 |
_version_ | 1782289197656178688 |
---|---|
author | Bloom, Philip A. Clement, Colin I. King, Anthony Noureddin, Baha Sharma, Kamal Hitchings, Roger A. Khaw, Peng T. |
author_facet | Bloom, Philip A. Clement, Colin I. King, Anthony Noureddin, Baha Sharma, Kamal Hitchings, Roger A. Khaw, Peng T. |
author_sort | Bloom, Philip A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Purpose. To compare the results of intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction by 3 treatment modalities, (a) glaucoma tube implants, (b) noncontact YAG laser cyclophotocoagulation (cycloYAG), and (c) contact transscleral diode laser cyclophotocoagulation (cyclodiode), in cases of advanced glaucoma refractory to alternative treatments. Methods. A consecutive group of 45 eyes that received cycloYAG were matched against two control groups of patients who had received tube surgery or cyclodiode, each control group having been derived from a database of patients. Results. Mean pretreatment IOP improved from 41.3, 38.6, and 32.0 mmHg for the tube, cycloYAG, and cyclodiode groups, respectively, to 16.4, 22.1, and 19.3 mmHg, respectively. Treatment success was achieved in 78%, 69%, and 71% of the tube, cycloYAG, and cyclodiode groups, respectively. Visual acuity deteriorated 2 or more Snellen lines in 16%, 7%, and 9% of the patients in the tube, cycloYAG, and cyclodiode groups, respectively. Complications included retinal detachment, hypotony, and phthisis. Conclusions. All 3 methods provided acceptable IOP lowering in the short and medium term. Control of IOP was best in patients receiving tube surgery. Cyclodiode and cycloYAG treatments were similarly effective in lowering IOP. Tube surgery was associated with a greater incidence of sight threatening complications. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3814063 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Hindawi Publishing Corporation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-38140632013-11-11 A Comparison between Tube Surgery, ND:YAG Laser and Diode Laser Cyclophotocoagulation in the Management of Refractory Glaucoma Bloom, Philip A. Clement, Colin I. King, Anthony Noureddin, Baha Sharma, Kamal Hitchings, Roger A. Khaw, Peng T. Biomed Res Int Research Article Purpose. To compare the results of intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction by 3 treatment modalities, (a) glaucoma tube implants, (b) noncontact YAG laser cyclophotocoagulation (cycloYAG), and (c) contact transscleral diode laser cyclophotocoagulation (cyclodiode), in cases of advanced glaucoma refractory to alternative treatments. Methods. A consecutive group of 45 eyes that received cycloYAG were matched against two control groups of patients who had received tube surgery or cyclodiode, each control group having been derived from a database of patients. Results. Mean pretreatment IOP improved from 41.3, 38.6, and 32.0 mmHg for the tube, cycloYAG, and cyclodiode groups, respectively, to 16.4, 22.1, and 19.3 mmHg, respectively. Treatment success was achieved in 78%, 69%, and 71% of the tube, cycloYAG, and cyclodiode groups, respectively. Visual acuity deteriorated 2 or more Snellen lines in 16%, 7%, and 9% of the patients in the tube, cycloYAG, and cyclodiode groups, respectively. Complications included retinal detachment, hypotony, and phthisis. Conclusions. All 3 methods provided acceptable IOP lowering in the short and medium term. Control of IOP was best in patients receiving tube surgery. Cyclodiode and cycloYAG treatments were similarly effective in lowering IOP. Tube surgery was associated with a greater incidence of sight threatening complications. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2013 2013-10-07 /pmc/articles/PMC3814063/ /pubmed/24222905 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/371951 Text en Copyright © 2013 Philip A. Bloom et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Bloom, Philip A. Clement, Colin I. King, Anthony Noureddin, Baha Sharma, Kamal Hitchings, Roger A. Khaw, Peng T. A Comparison between Tube Surgery, ND:YAG Laser and Diode Laser Cyclophotocoagulation in the Management of Refractory Glaucoma |
title | A Comparison between Tube Surgery, ND:YAG Laser and Diode Laser Cyclophotocoagulation in the Management of Refractory Glaucoma |
title_full | A Comparison between Tube Surgery, ND:YAG Laser and Diode Laser Cyclophotocoagulation in the Management of Refractory Glaucoma |
title_fullStr | A Comparison between Tube Surgery, ND:YAG Laser and Diode Laser Cyclophotocoagulation in the Management of Refractory Glaucoma |
title_full_unstemmed | A Comparison between Tube Surgery, ND:YAG Laser and Diode Laser Cyclophotocoagulation in the Management of Refractory Glaucoma |
title_short | A Comparison between Tube Surgery, ND:YAG Laser and Diode Laser Cyclophotocoagulation in the Management of Refractory Glaucoma |
title_sort | comparison between tube surgery, nd:yag laser and diode laser cyclophotocoagulation in the management of refractory glaucoma |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3814063/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24222905 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/371951 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bloomphilipa acomparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT clementcolini acomparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT kinganthony acomparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT noureddinbaha acomparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT sharmakamal acomparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT hitchingsrogera acomparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT khawpengt acomparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT bloomphilipa comparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT clementcolini comparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT kinganthony comparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT noureddinbaha comparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT sharmakamal comparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT hitchingsrogera comparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma AT khawpengt comparisonbetweentubesurgeryndyaglaseranddiodelasercyclophotocoagulationinthemanagementofrefractoryglaucoma |