Advertisement

Five-year clinical outcomes of combined phacoemulsification and trabectome surgery at a single glaucoma center

  • Hamed Esfandiari
  • Priyal Shah
  • Pooya Torkian
  • Ian P. Conner
  • Joel S. Schuman
  • Kiana Hassanpour
  • Nils A. LoewenEmail author
Glaucoma
  • 104 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To analyze the 5-year results of trabectome ab interno trabeculectomy of a single glaucoma center.

Method

In this retrospective interventional single-center case series, data of 93 patients undergoing ab interno trabeculotomy between September 2010, and December 2012 were included. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed using success criteria defined as postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) ≤ 21 mmHg, and > 20% reduction from preoperative IOP, and no need for further glaucoma surgery. Risk factors for failure were identified using Cox proportional hazards ratio (HR).

Results

The retention rate for 5-year follow-up was 66%. The cumulative probability of success at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years was 82.6%, 76.7%, 73.9%, 72.3%, and 67.5%. Risk factors for failure were lower baseline IOP (HR = 0.27, P = 0.001), younger age (HR = 0.25, P = 0.02), and higher central corneal thickness (HR = 0.18, P = 0.01). Exfoliative glaucoma was associated with a higher success rate (HR = 0.39, P = 0.02). IOP was decreased significantly from 20.0 ± 5.6 mmHg at baseline to 15.6 ± 4.6 mmHg at 5-year follow-up (P = 0.001). The baseline number of glaucoma medications was 1.8 ± 1.2, which decreased to 1.0 ± 1.2 medications at 5 years.

Conclusion

Trabectome surgery was associated with a good long-term efficacy and safety profile in this single-center case series with a high retention rate.

Keywords

Ab interno trabeculectomy Trabectome surgery Long-term outcomes Microinvasive glaucoma surgeries MIGS 

Notes

Funding

This study received financial support from The Initiative to Cure Glaucoma, The Eye and Ear Foundation of Pittsburgh, NIH CORE Grant P30 EY08098 to the Department of Ophthalmology, and from an unrestricted grant from Research to Prevent Blindness, New York, NY.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

NAL has received honoraria for trabectome wet labs and lectures from Neomedix Corp.

Ethical approval/ethics statement

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Statement of informed consent

For this type of study formal consent was not required.

References

  1. 1.
    Minckler D, Baerveldt G, Ramirez MA et al (2006) Clinical results with the trabectome, a novel surgical device for treatment of open-angle glaucoma. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 104:40–50Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kaplowitz K, Schuman JS, Loewen NA (2014) Techniques and outcomes of minimally invasive trabecular ablation and bypass surgery. Br J Ophthalmol 98:579–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fallano K, Bussel I, Kagemann L et al (2017) Training strategies and outcomes of ab interno trabeculectomy with the trabectome. F1000Res 6:67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tojo N, Abe S, Miyakoshi M, Hayashi A (2017) Comparison of intraocular pressure fluctuations before and after ab interno trabeculectomy in pseudoexfoliation glaucoma patients. Clin Ophthalmol 11:1667–1675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kaplowitz K, Loewen NA (2015) Trabectome-mediated ab Interno trabeculectomy for secondary glaucoma or as a secondary procedure. In: Advanced Glaucoma surgery. Springer, Cham, p 15–29Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Akil H, Chopra V, Huang A et al (2016) Clinical results of ab interno trabeculotomy using the trabectome in patients with pigmentary glaucoma compared to primary open angle glaucoma. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 44:563–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dang Y, Kaplowitz K, Parikh HA et al (2016) Steroid-induced glaucoma treated with trabecular ablation in a matched comparison with primary open-angle glaucoma. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 44:783–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Esfandiari H, Hassanpour K, Yaseri M, Loewen NA (2018) Extended pharmacological miosis is superfluous after glaucoma angle surgery: a retrospective study. F1000Res 7:178​Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bussel II, Kaplowitz K, Schuman JS et al (2015) Outcomes of ab interno trabeculectomy with the trabectome by degree of angle opening. Br J Ophthalmol 99:914–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bussel II, Kaplowitz K, Schuman JS et al (2014) Outcomes of ab interno trabeculectomy with the trabectome after failed trabeculectomy. Br J Ophthalmol 99:258–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mosaed S, Chak G, Haider A et al (2015) Results of trabectome surgery following failed glaucoma tube shunt implantation: cohort study. Medicine 94:e1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Francis BA, Minckler D, Dustin L et al (2008) Combined cataract extraction and trabeculotomy by the internal approach for coexisting cataract and open-angle glaucoma: initial results. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:1096–1103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Minckler D, Mosaed S, Dustin L et al (2008) Trabectome (trabeculectomy-internal approach): additional experience and extended follow-up. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 106:149–159 discussion 159–60Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mosaed S (2014) The first decade of global trabectome outcomes. Eur Ophthalmic Rev 08:113–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fewtrell MS, Kennedy K, Singhal A et al (2008) How much loss to follow-up is acceptable in long-term randomised trials and prospective studies? Arch Dis Child 93:458–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Parikh HA, Bussel II, Schuman JS et al (2016) Coarsened exact matching of phaco-trabectome to trabectome in phakic patients: lack of additional pressure reduction from phacoemulsification. PLoS One 11:e0149384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Neiweem AE, Bussel II, Schuman JS et al (2016) Glaucoma surgery calculator: limited additive effect of phacoemulsification on intraocular pressure in ab Interno trabeculectomy. PLoS One 11:e0153585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study 2 (1994) Visual field test scoring and reliability. Ophthalmology 101:1445–1455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Heuer DK, Barton K, Grehn F, et al (2009) Consensus on definitions of success. Guidelines on design and reporting of glaucoma surgical trials 15Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Esfandiari H, Shazly TA, Waxman SA et al (2018) Similar performance of trabectome and Ahmed glaucoma devices in a propensity score-matched comparison. J Glaucoma 27:490–495Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Esfandiari H, Pakravan M, Loewen NA, Yaseri M (2017) Predictive value of early postoperative IOP and bleb morphology in mitomycin-C augmented trabeculectomy. F1000Res 6:1898Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dang Y, Waxman S, Wang C et al (2017) Rapid learning curve assessment in an ex vivo training system for microincisional glaucoma surgery. Sci Rep 7:1605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jea SY, Mosaed S, Vold SD, Rhee DJ (2012) Effect of a failed trabectome on subsequent trabeculectomy. J Glaucoma 21:71–75Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kaplowitz K, Bussel II, Honkanen R et al (2016) Review and meta-analysis of ab-interno trabeculectomy outcomes. Br J Ophthalmol 100:594–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Luebke J, Boehringer D, Neuburger M et al (2015) Refractive and visual outcomes after combined cataract and trabectome surgery: a report on the possible influences of combining cataract and trabectome surgery on refractive and visual outcomes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 253:419–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ahuja Y, Ma Khin Pyi S, Malihi M et al (2013) Clinical results of ab interno trabeculotomy using the trabectome for open-angle glaucoma: the Mayo Clinic series in Rochester, Minnesota. Am J Ophthalmol 156:927–935.e2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jordan JF, Wecker T, van Oterendorp C et al (2013) Trabectome surgery for primary and secondary open angle glaucomas. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 251:2753–2760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Widder RA, Dinslage S, Rosentreter A et al (2014) A new surgical triple procedure in pseudoexfoliation glaucoma using cataract surgery, trabectome, and trabecular aspiration. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 252:1971–1975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Okeke CO, Miller-Ellis E, Rojas M, Trabectome Study Group (2017) Trabectome success factors. Medicine 96:e7061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ngai P, Kim G, Chak G et al (2016) Outcome of primary trabeculotomy ab interno (trabectome) surgery in patients with steroid-induced glaucoma. Medicine 95:e5383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chang SW, Tsai IL, Hu FR et al (2001) The cornea in young myopic adults. Br J Ophthalmol 85:916–920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    van Alphen GW (1986) Choroidal stress and emmetropization. Vis Res 26:723–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Goss DA, Van Veen HG, Rainey BB, Feng B (1997) Ocular components measured by keratometry, phakometry, and ultrasonography in emmetropic and myopic optometry students. Optom Vis Sci 74:489–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kotecha A, Elsheikh A, Roberts CR et al (2006) Corneal thickness- and age-related biomechanical properties of the cornea measured with the ocular response analyzer. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47:5337–5347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    de Kater AW, Shahsafaei A, Epstein DL (1992) Localization of smooth muscle and nonmuscle actin isoforms in the human aqueous outflow pathway. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 33:424–429Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gonzalez JM Jr, Ko MK, Hong Y-K et al (2017) Deep tissue analysis of distal aqueous drainage structures and contractile features. Sci Rep 7:17071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Waxman S, Loewen RT, Dang Y et al (2018) High-resolution, three-dimensional reconstruction of the outflow tract demonstrates segmental differences in cleared eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 59:2371–2380Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Ophthalmology, School of MedicineUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Ophthalmic Research CenterShahid Beheshti University of Medical SciencesTehranIran
  3. 3.Department of Ophthalmology, School of MedicineNew York UniversityNYUSA

Personalised recommendations