One-site versus two-site phacotrabeculectomy: A prospective randomized study

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


Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of one-site and two-site combined phacotrabeculectomy with foldable posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. Methods: Thirty-four patients (41 eyes) with glaucoma and cataract were randomly assigned to undergo either a one-site (22 eyes) or a two-site (19 eyes) combined procedure. One-site approach consisted of a standard superior phacotrabeculectomy with a limbus-based conjunctival flap, while two-site approach consisted of a clear cornea phacoemulsification and a separate superior trabeculectomy with a limbus-based conjunctival flap. Results: Mean follow-up period was 54 months (standard deviation [SD] 2.3). Mean preoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) in the one-site group was 21.3 mmHg (SD 2.8) and in the two-site group was 21.8 mmHg (SD 3.0) (P>.0.1). Mean postoperative IOP significantly decreased in both groups compared to the preoperative level and was 15.6 mmHg (SD 3.5) in the one-site group and 14.9 mmHg (SD 2.7) in the two-site group. Three months later, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (P=0.058). The one-site group required significantly more medications than the two-site group (P=0.03). Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improved similarly in both groups, but there was less postoperative (induced) astigmatism in the two-site group in a marginal statistical level (P=0.058). Intra- and postoperative complications were comparable in the two groups. Conclusion: Both techniques yielded similar results concerning final BCVA and IOP reduction. However, the two-site group had less induced astigmatism and a better postoperative IOP control with less required postoperative antiglaucoma medications compared to the one-site group.




Moschos, M. M., Chatziralli, I. P., & Tsatsos, M. (2015). One-site versus two-site phacotrabeculectomy: A prospective randomized study. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 10, 1393–1399.

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