Lens Extraction for Angle-Closure Glaucoma

  • Diamond Y. TamEmail author


Angle-closure glaucoma (ACG) is a growing problem and represents a significant proportion of glaucomas in Inuit, Chinese, and other Asian populations. Accurate and timely diagnosis of ACG is essential to its successful management. While clinical examination remains a critical linchpin to proper recognition and diagnosis, adjunctive imaging is also of great utility. This chapter reviews the classification and mechanism of the disease as well as a focus on the treatment of lens-mediated angle closure. Unique considerations for lens extraction in the angle-closure eye are reviewed including stabilization of the anterior chamber, pupil management, zonular laxity strategies, and lens disassembly techniques, and IOL choices are addressed as well as adjunctive procedures which may be performed to address differing mechanisms and severity of ACG. Finally, as these eyes are more prone to malignant glaucoma, the surgical management of this condition is also addressed.


Anterior Chamber Trabecular Meshwork Angle Closure Anterior Chamber Depth Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Supplementary material

Video 25.1

Non-compression gonioscopic view of peripheral anterior synechiae (Video courtesy of Ike K. Ahmed, MD) (MPG 3844 kb)

Video 25.2

In this video, it can be seen that after a small amount of dispersive OVD is injected into the anterior chamber, further deepening is unable to be achieved, even with a high-viscosity OVD, which when injected is pushed immediately back out of the eye. In order to create sufficient space in the anterior chamber to safely perform lens extraction, a pars plana tap is performed 4 mm posterior to the limbus. After the pars plana tap, the anterior chamber is comfortably deepened with a high-viscosity viscoadaptive OVD and, in this case, mini-sphincterotomies performed to assist in pupil management (Video courtesy of Ike K. Ahmed, MD) (MPG 123006 kb)

Video 25.3

In this angle-closure patient who underwent concurrent lens extraction, focal areas of atonicity were noted which were closed with 10-0 polypropylene pupilloplasty sutures. The nasal area is closed with an intraocular microtying technique with microinstrumentation in the anterior chamber, and the temporal iris is sutured using the McCannel technique (MOV 907932 kb)

Video 25.4

In this angle-closure patient who also underwent concurrent lens extraction, a 3-clock-hour atonic area was noted and closed with a partial iris cerclage suture using 10-0 polypropylene suture again. This is tied with a modified McCannel technique using a microtying forceps to bring one end of the suture intraocularly to eliminate the need to bring iris to the corneal incision. This results in less iris pulling and manipulation (MOV 588788 kb) (194 mb)
Video 25.5 In this angle-closure patient with an intumescent white cataract, prior to performing the capsulorhexis, the anterior capsule is punctured with a 27 gauge hypodermic needle and cortex immediately aspirated upon capsule puncture in order to decompress the contents of the capsular bag and decrease forward pressure on the anterior capsule. In the video, it can still be appreciated that during capsulorhexis, it exhibits a tendency to proceed outwards towards the equator and thus it was kept purposely on the small side (MOV 198633 kb) (532 mb)
Video 25.6 When the capsulorhexis proceeds too far towards the lens equator, it may be rescued using a tear-in technique. The flap should be folded over and pulled centrally to achieve a “boomerang” return of the trajectory of the capsulorhexis rescuing it from the equator. It can be seen in this angle-closure patient that even after the initial rescue maneuver, the capsulorhexis still has the tendency to proceed outwards due to the high lens vault and steep anterior capsular downward slope. As a result, much of the remainder of the capsulorhexis performed using a tear-in technique as well (MOV 544741 kb) (497.4 mb)
Video 25.7 This video illustrates the technique of suturing the capsular tension segment using a double armed 9-0 polypropylene suture, a 26 gauge hypodermic needle in which to dock the suture, and a partial-thickness scleral scratch incision made at the anticipated anteroposterior of the ciliary sulcus. One arm of the suture is passed through the eyelet of the CTS, while the other arm is passed outside of the eyelet (MOV 509349 kb)
Video 25.8

This video illustrates a case of spherophakia-induced angle-closure glaucoma. This patient underwent lens extraction with capsular tension ring implantation. The CTR was injected early on to achieve equatorial expansion and prevent collapse during phacoemulsification. When a CTR is injected early, it is imperative that definitive and careful viscodissection occur between the capsule and the cortex to avoid the CTR entrapping cortical material. In this case, the patient undergoes concurrent ECP and GSL. The CTR can be seen endoscopically (Video courtesy of Ike K. Ahmed, MD) (MPG 152571 kb)

Video 25.9

This video illustrates the injection of a CTR with a CTS being held in position by an inverted iris hook (Video courtesy of Ike K. Ahmed, MD) (MOV 166226 kb)

Video 25.10

This video illustrates endoscopic cycloplasty, the technique by which ablation of the ciliary processes is performed beginning with the tail of the process causing a downward rotation or shrinking of the ciliary processes thereby allowing the iris to fall posteriorly and open the angle (AVI 3949 kb)

Video 25.11

This video illustrates goniosynechialysis under visualization with a gonio mirror performed with anterior segment microinstrumentation (Video courtesy of Ike K. Ahmed, MD) (MPG 35928 kb)

Video 25.12

In this patient who had a penetrating keratoplasty previously, the gonio mirror prevented adequate view of the angle. As a result, GSL was performed with the assistance of an endoscopic probe (Video courtesy of Ike K. Ahmed, MD) (MPG 33393 kb)

Video 25.13

A vitrectomy-hyaloidotomy-iridectomy (VHI) is performed using an automated vitreous cutter in the anterior chamber through the previous LPI this patient had. With the assistance of anterior segment microforceps to grasp the iris, the vitrector can be placed as peripheral as possible to avoid making an excessively large iridectomy. The vitrector is then placed further posteriorly to cut through the zonules and hyaloid face and into the vitreous cavity. This procedure can also be performed from the pars plana cutting the vitreous first, then the hyaloid face, and the zonules and finally emerging through the peripheral iris into the anterior chamber (MOV 417549 kb)


  1. 1.
    Foster PJ. The epidemiology of primary angle closure and associated glaucomatous optic neuropathy. Semin Ophthalmol. 2002;17:50–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bonomi L, Marchini G, Marraffa M, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma and intraocular pressure distribution in a defined population. The Egna-Neumarkt Study. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:209–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mitchell P, Smith W, Attebo K, Healey PR. Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 1996;103:1661–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bankes JL, Perkins ES, Tsolakis S, Wright JE. Bedford glaucoma survey. Br Med J. 1968;1:791–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coffey M, Reidy A, Wormald R, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma in the west of Ireland. Br J Ophthalmol. 1993;77:17–21.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hollows FC, Graham PA. Intra-ocular pressure, glaucoma, and glaucoma suspects in a defined population. Br J Ophthalmol. 1966;50:570–86.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wensor MD, McCarty CA, Stanislavsky YL, et al. The prevalence of glaucoma in the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:733–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Klein BE, Klein R, Sponsel WE, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 1992;99:1499–504.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dielemans I, Vingerling JR, Wolfs RC, et al. The prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma in a population-based study in The Netherlands. The Rotterdam Study. Ophthalmology. 1994;101:1851–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bengtsson B. The prevalence of glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1981;65:46–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tielsch JM, Katz J, Singh K, et al. A population-based evaluation of glaucoma screening: the Baltimore Eye Survey. Am J Epidemiol. 1991;134:1102–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Buhrmann RR, Quigley HA, Barron Y, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma in a rural East African population. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:40–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rotchford AP, Kirwan JF, Muller MA, et al. Temba glaucoma study: a population-based cross-sectional survey in urban South Africa. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:376–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Van Rens GH, Arkell SM, Charlton W, Doesburg W. Primary angle-closure glaucoma among Alaskan Eskimos. Doc Ophthalmol. 1988;70:265–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Arkell SM, Lightman DA, Sommer A, et al. The prevalence of glaucoma among Eskimos of northwest Alaska. Arch Ophthalmol. 1987;105:482–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bourne RR, Sorensen KE, Klauber A, et al. Glaucoma in East Greenlandic Inuit – a population survey in Ittoqqortoormiit (Scoresbysund). Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2001;79:462–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Congdon NG, Quigley HA, Hung PT, et al. Screening techniques for angle-closure glaucoma in rural Taiwan. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1996;74:113–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    He M, Foster PJ, Ge J, et al. Prevalence and clinical characteristics of glaucoma in adult Chinese: a population-based study in Liwan District, Guangzhou. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47:2782–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Foster PJ, Baasanhu J, Alsbirk PH, et al. Glaucoma in Mongolia. A population-based survey in Hovsgol province, northern Mongolia. Arch Ophthalmol. 1996;114:1235–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Xu L, Zhang L, Xia CR, et al. The prevalence and its effective factors of primary angle-closure glaucoma in defined populations of rural and urban in Beijing [in Chinese]. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2005;41:8–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Foster PJ, Oen FT, Machin D, et al. The prevalence of glaucoma in Chinese residents of Singapore: a cross-sectional population survey of the Tanjong Pagar district. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118:1105–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Casson RJ, Newland HS, Muecke J, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma in rural Myanmar: the Meiktila Eye Study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007;91:710–4.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Salmon JF, Mermoud A, Ivey A, et al. The prevalence of primary angle closure glaucoma and open angle glaucoma in Mamre, Western Cape, South Africa. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;111:1263–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dandona L, Dandona R, Mandal P, et al. Angle-closure glaucoma in an urban population in southern India. The Andhra Pradesh eye disease study. Ophthalmology. 2000;107:1710–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bourne RR, Sukudom P, Foster PJ, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma in Thailand: a population based survey in Rom Klao District, Bangkok. Br J Ophthalmol. 2003;87:1069–74.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vijaya L, George R, Arvind H, et al. Prevalence of angle-closure disease in a rural southern Indian population. Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124:403–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ramakrishnan R, Nirmalan PK, Krishnadas R, et al. Glaucoma in a rural population of southern India: the Aravind comprehensive eye survey. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:1484–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rahman MM, Rahman N, Foster PJ, et al. The prevalence of glaucoma in Bangladesh: a population based survey in Dhaka division. Br J Ophthalmol. 2004;88:1493–7.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shiose Y, Kitazawa Y, Tsukahara S, et al. Epidemiology of glaucoma in Japan – a nationwide glaucoma survey. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 1991;35:133–55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yamamoto T, Iwase A, Araie M, et al. The Tajimi Study report 2: prevalence of primary angle closure and secondary glaucoma in a Japanese population. Ophthalmology. 2005;112:1661–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Quigley HA. Number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90:262–7.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Foster PJ, Johnson GJ. Glaucoma in China: how big is the problem? Br J Ophthalmol. 2001;85:1277–82.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Van Herick W, Shaffer RN, Schwartz A. Estimation of width of angle of anterior chamber. Incidence and significance of the narrow angle. Am J Ophthalmol. 1969;68:626–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lowe RF. Aetiology of the anatomical basis for primary angle-closure glaucoma. Biometrical comparisons between normal eyes and eyes with primary angle-closure glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1970;54:161–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gazzard G, Foster PJ, Friedman DS, et al. Light to dark physiological variation in iridotrabecular angle width. Br J Ophthalmol. 2004. Available at: Accessed 20 Apr 2013.
  36. 36.
    Quigley HA. Long-term follow-up of laser iridotomy. Ophthalmology. 1981;88:218–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    He M, Friedman DS, Ge J, et al. Laser peripheral iridotomy in primary angle-closure suspects: biometric and gonioscopic outcomes: the Liwan Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:494–500.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    He M, Friedman DS, Ge J, et al. Laser peripheral iridotomy in eyes with narrow drainage angles: ultrasound biomicroscopy outcomes. The Liwan Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:1513–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Greve EL. Primary angle closure glaucoma: extracapsular cataract extraction or filtering procedure? Int Ophthalmol. 1988;12:157–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Steuhl KP, Marahrens P, Frohn C, Frohn A. Intraocular pressure and anterior chamber depth before and after extracapsular cataract extraction with posterior chamber lens implantation. Ophthalmic Surg. 1992;23:233–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Yang CH, Hung PT. Intraocular lens position and anterior chamber angle changes after cataract extraction in eyes with primary angle-closure glaucoma. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1997;23:1109–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hayashi K, Hayashi H, Nakao F, Hayashi F. Changes in anterior chamber angle width and depth after intraocular lens implantation in eyes with glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2000;107:698–703.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tham CC, Lai JS, Lam DS. Changes in AC angle width and depth after IOL implantation in eyes with glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:428–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lam DS, Leung DY, Tham CC, et al. Randomized trial of early phacoemulsification versus peripheral iridotomy to prevent intraocular pressure rise after acute primary angle closure. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:1134–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wishart PK, Atkinson PL. Extracapsular cataract extraction and posterior chamber lens implantation in patients with primary chronic angle-closure glaucoma: effect on intraocular pressure control. Eye (Lond). 1989;3(Pt 6):706–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Gunning FP, Greve EL. Uncontrolled primary angle closure glaucoma: results of early intercapsular cataract extraction and posterior chamber lens implantation. Int Ophthalmol. 1991;15:237–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Acton J, Salmon JF, Scholtz R. Extracapsular cataract extraction with posterior chamber lens implantation in primary angle-closure glaucoma. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1997;23:930–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gunning FP, Greve EL. Lens extraction for uncontrolled angle-closure glaucoma: long-term follow-up. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1998;24:1347–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Roberts TV, Francis IC, Lertusumitkul S, et al. Primary phacoemulsification for uncontrolled angle-closure glaucoma. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000;26:1012–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hayashi K, Hayashi H, Nakao F, Hayashi F. Effect of cataract surgery on intraocular pressure control in glaucoma patients. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001;27:1779–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Jacobi PC, Dietlein TS, Luke C, et al. Primary phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation for acute angle-closure glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2002;109:1597–603.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Khokar K, Pangtey M. Phacoemulsification in filtered chronic angle closure glaucoma eyes. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2002;30:256–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ming Zhi Z, Lim AS, Yin Wong T. A pilot study of lens extraction in the management of acute primary angle-closure glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;135:534–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kubota T, Toguri I, Onizuka N, Matsuura T. Phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation for angle closure glaucoma after the relief of pupillary block. Ophthalmologica. 2003;217:325–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Tham CC, Kwong YY, Leung DY, et al. Phacoemulsification versus combined phacotrabeculectomy in medically uncontrolled chronic angle closure glaucoma with cataract. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:725–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Tham CC, Kwong YY, Baig N, et al. Phacoemulsification versus trabeculectomy in medically uncontrolled chronic angle closure glaucoma without cataract. Ophthalmology. 2013;120:62–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Tham CC, Kwong YY, Leung DY, et al. Phacoemulsification versus combined phacotrabeculectomy in medically controlled chronic angle closure glaucoma with cataract. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:2167–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Chang DF. Pars plana vitreous tap for phacoemulsification in the crowded eye. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001;27(12):1911–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    McCannel MA. A retrievable suture idea for anterior uveal problems. Ophthalmic Surg. 1976;7:98–103.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Siepser SB. The closer chamber slipping suture technique for iris repair. Ann Ophthalmol. 1994;26:71–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Little BC, Smith JH, Packer M. Little capsulorhexis tear-out rescue. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006;32(9):1420–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Bopp S, Lucke K. Chronic cystoid macular edema in an eye with a capsule defect and posteriorly dislocated capsular tension ring. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003;29:603–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Bhattacharjee H, Bhattacharjee K, Das A, et al. Management of a posteriorly dislocated endocapsular tension ring and a foldable acrylic intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004;30:243–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Hasanee K, Ahmed IK. Capsular tension rings: update on endocapsular support devices. Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2006;19:507–19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Boomer JA, Jackson DW. Anatomic evaluation of the Morcher capsular tension ring by ultrasound biomicroscopy. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006;32(5):846–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Tribus C, Alge CS, Haritoglou C, et al. Indications and clinical outcome of capsular tension ring (CTR) implantation: a review of 9528 cataract surgeries. Clin Ophthalmol. 2007;1:65–9.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Hasanee K, Butler M, Ahmed IK. Capsular tension rings and related devices: current concepts. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2006;17:31–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    DeBry P, Olson RJ, Crandall AS. Comparison of energy required for phaco-chop and divide and conquer phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1998;24:689–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Wong T, Hingorani M, Lee V. Phacoemulsification time and power requirements in phaco chop and divide and conquer nucleofractis techniques. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000;26:1374–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Pirazzoli G, D’Eliseo D, Ziosi M, Acciarri R. Effects of phacoemulsification time on the corneal endothelium using phacofracture and phaco chop techniques. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1996;22:967–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Guell JL, Velasco F, Malecaze F, et al. Secondary Artisan-Verisyse aphakic lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31:2266–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Tahzib NG, Nuijts RM, Wu WY. Long-term study of Artisan phakic intraocular lens implantation for the correction of moderate to high myopia. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:1133–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Saxena R, Boekhoorn SS, Mulder PG, et al. Long-term follow-up of endothelial cell change after Artisan phakic intraocular lens implantation. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:608–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Agarwal A, Jacob S, Kumar DA, et al. Handshake technique for glued intrascleral haptic fixation of a posterior chamber intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013;39:317–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Tran HV, Liebmann JM, Ritch R. Iridociliary apposition in plateau iris persists after cataract extraction. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;135:40–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Podbielski DW, Varma DK, Tam DY, Ahmed IIK. Endocycloplasty: a new technique for managing angle-closure glaucoma secondary to plateau iris syndrome. Glaucoma Today. Oct 2010.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Shingleton BJ, Chang MA, Bellows AR, Thomas JV. Surgical goniosynechialysis for angle-closure glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1990;97:551–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Tanihara H, Nishiwaki K, Nagata M. Surgical results and complications of goniosynechialysis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1992;230:309–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Teekhasaenee C, Ritch R. Combined phacoemulsification and goniosynechialysis for uncontrolled chronic angle-closure glaucoma after acute angle-closure glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1999;106:669–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Harasymowycz PJ, Papamatheakis DG, Ahmed I, et al. Phacoemulsification and goniosynechialysis in the management of unresponsive primary angle closure. J Glaucoma. 2005;14:186–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Fakhrale G, Vahedian Z, Moghimi S, et al. Phacoemulsification and goniosynechialysis for the management of refractory acute angle closure. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2012;22:714–8.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Canlas OA, Ishikawa H, Liebmann JM, et al. Ultrasound biomicroscopy before and after goniosynechialysis. Am J Ophthalmol. 2001;132:570–1.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Fang AW, Yang XJ, Nie L, Qu J. Endoscopically controlled goniosynechialysis in managing synechial angle-closure glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2010;19:19–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Luntz MH, Rosenblatt M. Malignant glaucoma. Surv Ophthalmol. 1987;32:73–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Quigley HA, Friedman DS, Congdon NG. Possible mechanisms of primary angle-closure and malignant glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2003;12:167–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Razeghinejad MR, Amini H, Esfandiari H. Lesser anterior chamber dimensions in women may be predisposing factor for malignant glaucoma. Med Hypotheses. 2005;64:572–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Prata TS, Dorairaj S, De Moraes CG, et al. Is pre-operative ciliary body and iris anatomical configuration a predictor of malignant glaucoma development? Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2013;41:541–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Cashwell LF, Martin TJ. Malignant glaucoma after laser iridotomy. Ophthalmology. 1992;99:651–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Muqit MM, Menage MJ. Malignant glaucoma after phacoemulsification: treatment with diode laser cyclophotocoagulation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007;33:130–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Simmons RJ. Malignant glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1972;56:263–72.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Chander PA, Grant WM. Mydriatic-cycloplegic treatment in malignant glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1962;68:353–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Weiss DI, Shaffer RN, Harrington DO. Treatment of malignant glaucoma with intravenous mannitol infusion. Medical reformation of the anterior chamber by means of an osmotic agent: a preliminary report. Arch Ophthalmol. 1963;69:154–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Little BC. Treatment of aphakic malignant glaucoma using Nd:YAG laser posterior capsulotomy. Br J Ophthalmol. 1994;78:499–501.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Brown RH, Lynch MG, Tearse JE, Nunn RD. Neodymium-YAG vitreous surgery for phakic and pseudophakic malignant glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1986;104:1464–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Epstein DL, Steinert RF, Puliafito CA. Neodymium-YAG laser therapy to the anterior hyaloid in aphakic malignant (ciliovitreal block) glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1984;98:137–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Carassa RG, Bettin P, Fiori M, Brancato R. Treatment of malignant glaucoma with contact transscleral cyclophotocoagulation. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:688–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Stumpf TH, Austin M, Bloom PA, et al. Transscleral cyclodiode laser photocoagulation in the treatment of aqueous misdirection syndrome. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:2058–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Sharma A, Sii F, Shah P, Kirkby GR. Vitrectomy-phacoemulsification-vitrectomy for the management of aqueous misdirection syndromes in phakic eyes. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:1968–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Harbour JW, Rubsamen PE, Palmberg P. Pars plana vitrectomy in the treatment of phakic and pseudophakic malignant glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1996;114:1073–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Bitrian E, Caprioli J. Pars plana anterior vitrectomy, hyaloido-zonulectomy, and iridectomy for aqueous humor misdirection. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010;150:82–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Dave P, Senthil S, Rao HL, Garudadri CS. Treatment outcomes in malignant glaucoma. Ophtholmology. 2013;120:984–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of OphthalmologyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations