Predictability of ab-interno trabeculectomy success in the subsequent eye: A contralateral eye comparison study

7Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: To determine whether the outcome of the first eye may serve as a predictor for intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering effectiveness in the second eye following bilateral ab interno trabeculectomy. Methods: This retrospective single-centre study included 168 eyes from 84 participants, who underwent combined Trabectome surgery with phacoemulsification cataract surgery in a hospital setting. The clinical endpoint was defined as either ‘success’ or ‘failure’ based on four separate scores at the longest follow-up time point: IOP at follow-up <21 mm Hg (Score A) or IOP < 18 mm Hg (Score B), without re-surgery and IOP reduction >20%; IOP ≤15 mm Hg without re-surgery and IOP reduction ≥40% (Score C); and the sole absence of re-surgery according to the discretion of the surgeon (Score D). Results: No significant difference was observed between the outcomes of first and second eyes. The frequency of success in the second eye after effective surgery in the first eye significantly exceeded that after prior failure. Within our analysis, the probability calculations determined a 75% chance of success following prior success for Score A. If surgery in the first eye failed, the chance of success in the subsequent eye was 37%. The corresponding probabilities were 79% and 32% for Score B, 56% and 9% for Score C, and 99% and 50% for Score D. Conclusion: The results of our study offer a useful tool to assess the success of subsequent eye surgeries based on the outcome in the initial eye, owing to the high predictive potential.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kiessling, D., Rennings, C., Hild, M., Lappas, A., Dietlein, T. S., Roessler, G. F., & Widder, R. A. (2021). Predictability of ab-interno trabeculectomy success in the subsequent eye: A contralateral eye comparison study. Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 49(3), 242–250. https://doi.org/10.1111/ceo.13905

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free