Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Br J Ophthalmol ; 106(10): 1399-1405, 2022 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33931389

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To compare outcomes of primary trabeculectomy using either mitomycin C (MMC) alone versus MMC augmented with intracamerular bevacizumab in patients with open-angle glaucoma. METHODS: Retrospective, cohort, two-centre, comparative study. Patients' data were screened between October 2015 and March 2019, with inclusion requiring a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Primary outcome was intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering at 24 months, with surgical success defined with different maximum IOP targets (≤18, ≤16 and ≤14 mm Hg) and at least 30% reduction and higher than 5 mm Hg. Absolute success was achieved if no IOP-lowering medication was needed and a qualified success if otherwise. Safety outcomes were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 110 eyes underwent trabeculectomy with MMC, 51 of these combined with intracamerular bevacizumab. Both strategies were effective in terms of IOP lowering (baseline vs 2 years postoperatively: 24.4 (8.0) mm Hg vs 12.1 (5.3) mm Hg in the MMC group; 25.1 (8.7) vs 10.8 (3.8) mm Hg in the MMC+bevacizumab group; p<0.001 in both comparisons). The MMC+bevacizumab group had a significant difference towards higher efficacy on absolute success rates at all targets (IOP≤14 or ≤16 or ≤18 mm Hg; p=0.010, p=0.039 and p=0.007, respectively). The large majority (93%) of the MMC+bevacizumab group was drop-free at 24 months, and 41% had IOP below 10 mm Hg. Complication rates were low and similar between groups, with no systemic adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Intracamerular bevacizumab in MMC-augmented primary trabeculectomy increases the chances of obtaining low IOP outcomes. This strategy may be useful when planning for surgeries aiming at target pressures in the low teens. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN93098069.


Asunto(s)
Glaucoma de Ángulo Abierto , Trabeculectomía , Adolescente , Inhibidores de la Angiogénesis/uso terapéutico , Bevacizumab/uso terapéutico , Estudios de Seguimiento , Glaucoma de Ángulo Abierto/tratamiento farmacológico , Glaucoma de Ángulo Abierto/cirugía , Humanos , Presión Intraocular , Mitomicina/uso terapéutico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular
2.
Br J Ophthalmol ; 104(10): 1378-1383, 2020 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31980421

RESUMEN

AIM: Comparing outcomes after combined phacoemulsification, two iStents insertion and endocyclophotocoagulation (ECP) versus phacoemulsification-iStents alone. METHODS: This is a longitudinal retrospective 12 months study in eyes with ocular hypertension or early-to-moderate open angle glaucoma. Level of disease, intraocular pressure (IOP) and tolerance of glaucoma medication were considered before planning surgery. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA-logMAR), IOP (mm Hg), number of medications were assessed at baseline, week 1, week 5, month 3, 6, 12 postop. MAIN OUTCOME: percentage (%) in IOP reduction at 12 months vs medicated baseline. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: absolute values of IOP/medication reduction, BCVA and postop complications. RESULTS: The ICE2 (two iStents-cataract extraction-ECP) group included 63 eyes and Phaco-iStent group included 46 eyes. Baseline IOP was higher in the ICE2 than phaco-iStent group (19.97±4.31 mm Hg vs 17.63±3.86 mm Hg, p=0.004) and mean deviation was lower (-7.20±2.58 dB vs -4.94±4.51 dB, p=0.037). Number of medications were comparable at baseline: 2.22±1.06 (ICE2) vs 2.07±1.02 (phaco-iStent), p=0.442. At month 12 postop, IOP in the ICE2 group decreased 35% from baseline vs 21% in the phaco-iStent group (p=0.03); absolute IOP reduction was significantly lower than baseline in each group (p<0.001), yet final IOP was lower in the ICE2 group than phaco-iStent group (13.05±2.18 mm Hg vs 14.09±1.86 mm Hg, p=0.01). Similar results were found for glaucoma medication (1.24±1.05 in ICE2 group vs 1.39±1.03 in phaco-iStent group, p=0.01). Final BCVA was 0.11±0.18 (phaco-iStent group) vs 0.08±0.08 (ICE2 group), p=0.309. Safety outcomes were comparable between groups. CONCLUSION: ICE2 procedure offers better results in IOP/medication reduction at 12 months than phacoemulsification-iStents alone.


Asunto(s)
Cuerpo Ciliar/cirugía , Implantes de Drenaje de Glaucoma , Glaucoma de Ángulo Abierto/cirugía , Coagulación con Láser , Facoemulsificación , Stents , Malla Trabecular/cirugía , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antihipertensivos/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Glaucoma de Ángulo Abierto/diagnóstico , Glaucoma de Ángulo Abierto/fisiopatología , Gonioscopía , Humanos , Presión Intraocular/fisiología , Implantación de Lentes Intraoculares , Masculino , Hipertensión Ocular/diagnóstico , Hipertensión Ocular/fisiopatología , Hipertensión Ocular/cirugía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Tonometría Ocular , Resultado del Tratamiento , Agudeza Visual/fisiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA