Cargando…
Comparison of ExPress Mini-Device Implantation Alone or Combined with Phacoemulsification for the Treatment of Open-Angle Glaucoma
We propose comparative assessment of the effectiveness of two surgical methods for the treatment of open-angle glaucoma: (1) ExPress mini-device implantation combined with phacoemulsification and (2) ExPress mini-device implantation alone. In this prospective study, 81 patients (88 phakic eyes) with...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4630402/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26576293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/613280 |
_version_ | 1782398696231534592 |
---|---|
author | Stawowski, Łukasz Konopińska, Joanna Deniziak, Marta Saeed, Emil Zalewska, Renata Mariak, Zofia |
author_facet | Stawowski, Łukasz Konopińska, Joanna Deniziak, Marta Saeed, Emil Zalewska, Renata Mariak, Zofia |
author_sort | Stawowski, Łukasz |
collection | PubMed |
description | We propose comparative assessment of the effectiveness of two surgical methods for the treatment of open-angle glaucoma: (1) ExPress mini-device implantation combined with phacoemulsification and (2) ExPress mini-device implantation alone. In this prospective study, 81 patients (88 phakic eyes) with uncontrolled open-angle glaucoma enrolled for surgery. They were assigned two groups, those with coexisting cataracts (46 eyes; P-ExPress group) and those with glaucoma alone (42 eyes; ExPress group). The follow-up period was 12.9 ± 0.4 months in P-ExPress and 12.2 ± 0.6 months in ExPress group. In both groups the following parameters were measured: best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), number of complications and necessary postoperative interventions, and number of glaucoma medications. The IOP at the end of follow-up was similar in both groups (18.8 ± 5.9 versus 18.1 ± 4.8 mmHg; P = 0.814). There were no statistical differences in the average number of glaucoma medications between ExPress and P-ExPress groups (0.9 ± 1.65 versus 1.3 ± 1.7; P = 0.419) as well as in the number of postoperative complications (26 versus 21%; P = 0.179 in the P-ExPress and ExPress groups, resp.). Both methods are safe and effective for the surgical treatment of open-angle glaucoma. Coexistence of cataracts does not constitute a compelling contraindication for combined surgery. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4630402 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Hindawi Publishing Corporation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46304022015-11-16 Comparison of ExPress Mini-Device Implantation Alone or Combined with Phacoemulsification for the Treatment of Open-Angle Glaucoma Stawowski, Łukasz Konopińska, Joanna Deniziak, Marta Saeed, Emil Zalewska, Renata Mariak, Zofia J Ophthalmol Research Article We propose comparative assessment of the effectiveness of two surgical methods for the treatment of open-angle glaucoma: (1) ExPress mini-device implantation combined with phacoemulsification and (2) ExPress mini-device implantation alone. In this prospective study, 81 patients (88 phakic eyes) with uncontrolled open-angle glaucoma enrolled for surgery. They were assigned two groups, those with coexisting cataracts (46 eyes; P-ExPress group) and those with glaucoma alone (42 eyes; ExPress group). The follow-up period was 12.9 ± 0.4 months in P-ExPress and 12.2 ± 0.6 months in ExPress group. In both groups the following parameters were measured: best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), number of complications and necessary postoperative interventions, and number of glaucoma medications. The IOP at the end of follow-up was similar in both groups (18.8 ± 5.9 versus 18.1 ± 4.8 mmHg; P = 0.814). There were no statistical differences in the average number of glaucoma medications between ExPress and P-ExPress groups (0.9 ± 1.65 versus 1.3 ± 1.7; P = 0.419) as well as in the number of postoperative complications (26 versus 21%; P = 0.179 in the P-ExPress and ExPress groups, resp.). Both methods are safe and effective for the surgical treatment of open-angle glaucoma. Coexistence of cataracts does not constitute a compelling contraindication for combined surgery. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015 2015-10-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4630402/ /pubmed/26576293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/613280 Text en Copyright © 2015 Łukasz Stawowski 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 Stawowski, Łukasz Konopińska, Joanna Deniziak, Marta Saeed, Emil Zalewska, Renata Mariak, Zofia Comparison of ExPress Mini-Device Implantation Alone or Combined with Phacoemulsification for the Treatment of Open-Angle Glaucoma |
title | Comparison of ExPress Mini-Device Implantation Alone or Combined with Phacoemulsification for the Treatment of Open-Angle Glaucoma |
title_full | Comparison of ExPress Mini-Device Implantation Alone or Combined with Phacoemulsification for the Treatment of Open-Angle Glaucoma |
title_fullStr | Comparison of ExPress Mini-Device Implantation Alone or Combined with Phacoemulsification for the Treatment of Open-Angle Glaucoma |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of ExPress Mini-Device Implantation Alone or Combined with Phacoemulsification for the Treatment of Open-Angle Glaucoma |
title_short | Comparison of ExPress Mini-Device Implantation Alone or Combined with Phacoemulsification for the Treatment of Open-Angle Glaucoma |
title_sort | comparison of express mini-device implantation alone or combined with phacoemulsification for the treatment of open-angle glaucoma |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4630402/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26576293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/613280 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT stawowskiłukasz comparisonofexpressminideviceimplantationaloneorcombinedwithphacoemulsificationforthetreatmentofopenangleglaucoma AT konopinskajoanna comparisonofexpressminideviceimplantationaloneorcombinedwithphacoemulsificationforthetreatmentofopenangleglaucoma AT deniziakmarta comparisonofexpressminideviceimplantationaloneorcombinedwithphacoemulsificationforthetreatmentofopenangleglaucoma AT saeedemil comparisonofexpressminideviceimplantationaloneorcombinedwithphacoemulsificationforthetreatmentofopenangleglaucoma AT zalewskarenata comparisonofexpressminideviceimplantationaloneorcombinedwithphacoemulsificationforthetreatmentofopenangleglaucoma AT mariakzofia comparisonofexpressminideviceimplantationaloneorcombinedwithphacoemulsificationforthetreatmentofopenangleglaucoma |