International Ophthalmology

, Volume 39, Issue 10, pp 2341–2351 | Cite as

Comparison of the effect of mitomycin C and bevacizumab–methylcellulose mixture on combined phacoemulsification and non-penetrating deep sclerectomy surgery on the intraocular pressure (a clinical trial study)

  • Ali Mostafaei
  • Nazli TaheriEmail author
  • Morteza Ghojazadeh
  • Atena Latifi
  • Neda Moghaddam
Original Paper



Comparison of the effect of mitomycin C (MMC) versus bevacizumab–methylcellulose mixture (BMM) on combined phacoemulsification and non-penetrating deep sclerectomy surgery on the intraocular pressure in patients with open-angle glaucoma was made.


The current study is a controlled, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Thirty-eight patients were enrolled, with a total of 40 eyes, and underwent a combined phacoemulsification and non-penetrating deep sclerectomy surgery from 2016 to 2017. MMC with concentration of 0.2 mg/mL for 2 min was used for 20 eyes before separating the scleral flap, and 0.3 mL of BMM (bevacizumab 1.25 mg incorporated into 2% methylcellulose) was injected subconjunctivally following surgery. The success rate of surgery was categorized as complete, relative and failure. Fisher’s exact, Mann–Whitney U and Chi-square tests were employed to data analysis. A p value < 0.05 was supposed significant.


Patients had the same distribution in terms of age, sex, type of glaucoma and type of cataract. Patients were followed up for a mean of 6 months. The mean intraocular pressure before surgery in the MMC group was 24.85 ± 2.83 mmHg with 3.2 ± 0.523 anti-glaucoma drugs, which reached 13.75 ± 3.552 mmHg with 0.15 ± 0.489 anti-glaucoma drugs at the latest visit. The average intraocular pressure before surgery in the BMM group was 24.45 ± 2.48 mmHg with 2.9 ± 0.641 anti-glaucoma drugs, which reached 15.40 ± 3.267 mmHg with 0.25 ± 0.55 anti-glaucoma drug at the last follow-up. The intraocular pressure was notably lower in the MMC group than BMM group 6 months after surgery. There was not a significant difference from the aspect of success rate and failure rate among the two groups at the 6-month follow-up (p = 0.135).


Based on the results of this study, MMC and bevacizumab–methylcellulose both seem to be effective in the success of combined phacoemulsification and non-penetrating deep sclerectomy surgery, but MMC decreases intraocular pressure in patients at 6 months post-surgery.


Non-penetrating deep sclerectomy Mitomycin C Bevacizumab–methylcellulose mixture Intraocular pressure Phacoemulsification 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Panahibazaz MR, Zamani M, Sharifipoor F et al (2015) Intraoperative mitomycin-C versus bevacizumab on success rate of phacotrabeculectomy. Persian J Med Sci. 1:41–45Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sengupta S, Venkatesh R, Ravindran RD et al (2012) Safety and efficacy of using off-label bevacizumab versus mitomycin C to prevent bleb failure in a single-site phacotrabeculectomy by a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Glaucoma 21:450–459PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burr J, Azuara-Blanco A, Avenell A (2005) Medical versus surgical interventions for open angle glaucoma. Chochrane Database Syst Rev 18:CD004399Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anand N, Chunxiao B et al (2015) Deep sclerectomy with bevacizumab and mitomycin C: a comparative study. J Glaucoma 24:25–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Akkan JU, Cilsim S (2015) Role of subconjunctival bevacizumab as an adjuvant to primary trabeculectomy: a prospective randomized comparative 1-year follow-up study. J Glaucoma 24:1–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nilforushan N, Yadgari M, Kish SK et al (2012) Subconjunctival bevacizumab versus mitomycin C adjunctive to trabeculectomy. Am J Ophthalmol 153:352–357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hitchings RA, Grierson I (1983) Clinico pathological correlation in eyes with failed fistulizing surgery. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK 103(pt 1):84–88PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Charnock-Jones DS (2005) Vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGFs), their receptors and their inhibition. Cell Trans 21(1):1–5Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Murakami M, Iwai S, Hiratsuka S et al (2006) Signaling of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1 tyrosine kinase promotes rheumatoid artritis through activation of monocytes/macrophages. Blood 108:1849–1856PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wilgus TA, Ferreira AM, Oberyszyn TM et al (2008) Regulation of scar formation by vascular endothelial growth factor. Lab Invest 88:579–590PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yamamoto T, Varani J, Soong HK et al (1990) Effects of 5-fluorouracil and mitomycin C on cultured rabbit subconjunctival fibroblasts. Ophthalmology 97:1204–1210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Skuta GL, Beeson CC, Higginbotham EJ et al (1992) Intraoperative mitomycin versus postoperative 5-fluorouracil in high risk glaucoma filtering surgery. Ophthalmology 99:438–444PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kitazawa Y, Kawase K, Matsushita H et al (1991) Trabeculectomy with mitomycin: a comparative study with fluorouracil. Arch Ophthalmol 109:1693–1698PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Singh K, Mehta K, Shaikh NM et al (2000) Trabeculectomy with intraoperative mitomycin C versus 5-fluorouracil. Prospective randomized clinical trial. Ophthalmology 107:2305–2309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    The Fluorouracil Filtering Surgery Study Group (1989) Fluorouracil filtering surgery study one-year follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol 108(625–635):309Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ferrara N, Houck KA, Jakeman LB et al (1991) The vascular endothelial growth factor family of polypeptides. J Cell Biochem 47:211–218PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bates DO, Jones RP (2003) The role of vascular endothelial growth factor in wound healing. Int J Low Extrem Wounds 2:107–120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Van Bergen T, Vandewalle E, Van de Viere S et al (2011) The role of different VEGF isoforms in scar formation after glaucoma filtration surgery. Exp Eye Res 93:689–699PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Li Z, Van Bergen T, Van de Viere S et al (2009) Inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor reduces scar formation after glaucoma filtration surgery. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 50:5217–5225PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stamper RL, Mcmenemy MG, Lieberman MF (1992) Hypotonous maculopathy after trabeculectomy with subconjunctiva 5-fluorouracil. Am J Ophthalmol 114(5):544–553PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Watson PG, Jakeman C, Ozturk M, Barnett MF, Barnett F, Khaw KT (1990) The complications of trabeculectomy (a 20-year follow-up). Eye 4(Pt 3):425–438PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lama PJ, Fechtner RD (2003) Antifibrotics and wound healing in glaucoma surgery. Surv Ophthalmol 48(3):314–346PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wakabayashi T, Oshima Y, Sakaguchi H et al (2008) Intravitreal bevacizumab to treat iris neovascularization and neovascular glaucoma secondary to ischemic retinal diseases in 41 consecutive cases. Ophthalmology 115:1571–1580PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Iliev ME, Domig D, Wolf-Schnurrbursch U et al (2006) Intravitreal bevacizumab (Avastin) in the treatment of neovascular glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 142:1054–1056PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Moraczewski AL, Lee RK, Palmberg PF et al (2009) Outcomes of treatment of neovascular glaucoma with intravitreal bevacizumab. Br J Ophthalmol 93:589–593PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li Z, Van Bergen T, Van de Viere S et al (2009) Inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor reduces scar formation after glaucoma filtration surgery. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 50:5217–5225PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jampel HD, Solus JF, Tracey PA et al (2012) Outcomes and blebrelated complications of trabeculectomy. Ophthalmology 119:712–722PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bindlish R, Condon GP, Schlosser JD et al (2002) Efficacy and safety of mitomycin-C in primary trabeculectomy: five-year follow-up. Ophthalmology 109:1336–1341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mostafaei A, Sedghipour MR, Taghavi Y (2011) Low-dose subconjunctival bevacizumab to augment trabeculectomy for glaucoma. Clin Ophthalmol 5:797–800PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ali Mostafaei
    • 1
  • Nazli Taheri
    • 2
    Email author
  • Morteza Ghojazadeh
    • 1
  • Atena Latifi
    • 2
  • Neda Moghaddam
    • 2
  1. 1.Iran Evidence-Based Medicine Research Center (EBM)Tabriz University of Medical SciencesTabrizIran
  2. 2.Nikookari Eye HospitalTabriz University of Medical SciencesTabrizIran

Personalised recommendations