Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao International Ophtha...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
International Ophthalmology
Article . 1997 . Peer-reviewed
License: Springer TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

Deep sclerectomy: results with and without collagen implant

Authors: Sanchez E; Schnyder CC; Sickenberg M; Chiou AG; Hédiguer SE; Mermoud A;

Deep sclerectomy: results with and without collagen implant

Abstract

To study the need, the safety and the success rate of collagen implant in eyes that underwent deep sclerectomy, a new non penetrating filtration procedure, we compared the results of deep sclerectomy with (DSCI) and without (DS) collagen implant.Of 168 patients (168 eyes) with various types of medically uncontrolled open angle glaucoma, 86 (86 eyes) underwent DSCI, and 82 (82 eyes) underwent DS. Visual acuity, slit lamp examination, intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements were performed before surgery and prospectively at days 1 and 7 and months, 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, and 24 after surgery. Deep sclerectomy was performed according to Kozlov's original technique. The collagen implant drainage device was radially secured in the center of the deep sclerectomy dissection.The mean follow-up period was 9.7 +/- 6.5 months for DSCI, and 9.0 +/- 4.8 months for DS. The mean preoperative IOP was 26.9 +/- 8.8 mmHg for DSCI and 25.8 +/- 8.5 mmHg for DS. The mean postoperative IOP and visual acuity were similar between the two groups. Complete and qualified success rates were better when the collagen implant was used (Log-Rank test: p = 0.0002 and 0.033 for complete and qualified success respectively). The need for postoperative glaucoma medications was significantly lower when the collagen implant was used (0.2 +/- 0.5 versus 0.5 +/- 0.7 medication per patient in the DSCI and DS respectively, Student's t test: p = 0.0038). There was significantly less bleb fibrosis when the collagen implant was used (2% and 11% in DSCI and DS respectively, p = 0.029).The collagen implant device is safe, increases the success rate of deep sclerectomy, and lowers the need for postoperative glaucoma medications.

Keywords

Male, Time Factors, Antimetabolites, Visual Acuity, Glaucoma, Prostheses and Implants, Postoperative Complications, Treatment Outcome, Drainage, Humans, Sclerostomy, Female, Collagen, Fluorouracil, Postoperative Period, Intraocular Pressure, Aged, Follow-Up Studies, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    159
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 1%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
159
Top 10%
Top 1%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!