Cargando…

Fornix-based versus limbal-based conjunctival flaps in trabeculectomy with mitomycin C in high-risk patients

PURPOSE: To compare the surgical outcomes of limbal-based and fornix-based trabeculectomy in eyes with a history of ocular incisional surgery. METHODS: Twenty-six eyes underwent limbal-based trabeculectomy (group LB), and were condition matched with 26 eyes that received fornix-based trabeculectomy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kuroda, Utako, Inoue, Toshihiro, Awai-Kasaoka, Nanako, Shobayashi, Kohei, Kojima, Sachi, Tanihara, Hidenobu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4031201/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24868145
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S61342
_version_ 1782317500431597568
author Kuroda, Utako
Inoue, Toshihiro
Awai-Kasaoka, Nanako
Shobayashi, Kohei
Kojima, Sachi
Tanihara, Hidenobu
author_facet Kuroda, Utako
Inoue, Toshihiro
Awai-Kasaoka, Nanako
Shobayashi, Kohei
Kojima, Sachi
Tanihara, Hidenobu
author_sort Kuroda, Utako
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare the surgical outcomes of limbal-based and fornix-based trabeculectomy in eyes with a history of ocular incisional surgery. METHODS: Twenty-six eyes underwent limbal-based trabeculectomy (group LB), and were condition matched with 26 eyes that received fornix-based trabeculectomy (group FB). Surgical failure was recorded retrospectively if the intraocular pressure value was either ≥21, ≥18, and ≥15 mmHg (conditions A, B, and C, respectively) or <4 mmHg or if the patient required additional glaucoma surgery. Kaplan–Meier survival curve analysis was used to assess surgical failure. RESULTS: For condition A, the 2 year surgical success probabilities were 75.0% and 63.9% in groups FB and LB, respectively (P=0.124). The corresponding values were 55.0% and 61.7% (P=0.638) in condition B, and 55.0% and 57.0% (P=0.454) in condition C. The rates of bleb leakage, hypotony, choroidal detachment, and bleb-related infection were 11.5%, 26.9%, 50.0%, and 7.7% in group LB, respectively. The corresponding values in group FB were 30.8%, 23.1%, 46.2%, and 0.0%, which were not statistically different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: No significant differences in surgical outcomes were observed between limbal-based and fornix-based trabeculectomy for patients with a history of incisional ocular surgeries.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4031201
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40312012014-05-27 Fornix-based versus limbal-based conjunctival flaps in trabeculectomy with mitomycin C in high-risk patients Kuroda, Utako Inoue, Toshihiro Awai-Kasaoka, Nanako Shobayashi, Kohei Kojima, Sachi Tanihara, Hidenobu Clin Ophthalmol Original Research PURPOSE: To compare the surgical outcomes of limbal-based and fornix-based trabeculectomy in eyes with a history of ocular incisional surgery. METHODS: Twenty-six eyes underwent limbal-based trabeculectomy (group LB), and were condition matched with 26 eyes that received fornix-based trabeculectomy (group FB). Surgical failure was recorded retrospectively if the intraocular pressure value was either ≥21, ≥18, and ≥15 mmHg (conditions A, B, and C, respectively) or <4 mmHg or if the patient required additional glaucoma surgery. Kaplan–Meier survival curve analysis was used to assess surgical failure. RESULTS: For condition A, the 2 year surgical success probabilities were 75.0% and 63.9% in groups FB and LB, respectively (P=0.124). The corresponding values were 55.0% and 61.7% (P=0.638) in condition B, and 55.0% and 57.0% (P=0.454) in condition C. The rates of bleb leakage, hypotony, choroidal detachment, and bleb-related infection were 11.5%, 26.9%, 50.0%, and 7.7% in group LB, respectively. The corresponding values in group FB were 30.8%, 23.1%, 46.2%, and 0.0%, which were not statistically different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: No significant differences in surgical outcomes were observed between limbal-based and fornix-based trabeculectomy for patients with a history of incisional ocular surgeries. Dove Medical Press 2014-05-15 /pmc/articles/PMC4031201/ /pubmed/24868145 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S61342 Text en © 2014 Kuroda et al. This work is published by Dove Medical Press Ltd, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Ltd, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Kuroda, Utako
Inoue, Toshihiro
Awai-Kasaoka, Nanako
Shobayashi, Kohei
Kojima, Sachi
Tanihara, Hidenobu
Fornix-based versus limbal-based conjunctival flaps in trabeculectomy with mitomycin C in high-risk patients
title Fornix-based versus limbal-based conjunctival flaps in trabeculectomy with mitomycin C in high-risk patients
title_full Fornix-based versus limbal-based conjunctival flaps in trabeculectomy with mitomycin C in high-risk patients
title_fullStr Fornix-based versus limbal-based conjunctival flaps in trabeculectomy with mitomycin C in high-risk patients
title_full_unstemmed Fornix-based versus limbal-based conjunctival flaps in trabeculectomy with mitomycin C in high-risk patients
title_short Fornix-based versus limbal-based conjunctival flaps in trabeculectomy with mitomycin C in high-risk patients
title_sort fornix-based versus limbal-based conjunctival flaps in trabeculectomy with mitomycin c in high-risk patients
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4031201/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24868145
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S61342
work_keys_str_mv AT kurodautako fornixbasedversuslimbalbasedconjunctivalflapsintrabeculectomywithmitomycincinhighriskpatients
AT inouetoshihiro fornixbasedversuslimbalbasedconjunctivalflapsintrabeculectomywithmitomycincinhighriskpatients
AT awaikasaokananako fornixbasedversuslimbalbasedconjunctivalflapsintrabeculectomywithmitomycincinhighriskpatients
AT shobayashikohei fornixbasedversuslimbalbasedconjunctivalflapsintrabeculectomywithmitomycincinhighriskpatients
AT kojimasachi fornixbasedversuslimbalbasedconjunctivalflapsintrabeculectomywithmitomycincinhighriskpatients
AT taniharahidenobu fornixbasedversuslimbalbasedconjunctivalflapsintrabeculectomywithmitomycincinhighriskpatients