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 Canadian Journal of ...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
Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology
Article . 2008 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation in uveitic glaucoma versus open-angle glaucoma patients

Authors: Rony, Rachmiel; Graham E, Trope; Yvonne M, Buys; John G, Flanagan; Mary L, Chipman;

Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation in uveitic glaucoma versus open-angle glaucoma patients

Abstract

The poor long-term success rate of repeat trabeculectomies in refractory uveitic glaucoma (UG) patients has led to the use of glaucoma drainage devices (GDDs). However, the success and complication rates of GDDs in UG patients utilizing a control group with standard demographic data, design, and surgical technique have never been evaluated.Fifteen patients (15 eyes) with chronic uveitis and 53 patients (53 eyes) with uncontrolled open-angle glaucoma (OAG) who underwent Ahmed glaucoma valve (AGV) implantation were included in a retrospective, comparative, case-controlled study. Postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP), number of antiglaucoma medications, visual acuity, and complications were compared.There was a significant difference between the UG versus the OAG group with respect to age only (59.3 years vs 68.4 years, p = 0.006). Regression analysis of the postoperative IOP controlled for age and glaucoma type, and preoperative IOP revealed significantly lower IOP in the UG group at 1 month (p = 0.04; 95% confidence interval [CI] -5.9 to 0.15) and 2 months (p = 0.008; 95% CI -6.0 to 0.97). No significant differences were found at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 30 months. The cumulative success rates at 3 to 30 months for the UG and OAG groups were 80% to 66.6% versus 84.9% to 57% (p = 0.713), respectively. The only complication between the 2 groups that was significantly different was tube removal, which occurred more often in the UG group (p = 0.018).AGV implantation is an effective and safe procedure in the management of UG, similar to primary OAG.

Keywords

Male, Visual Acuity, Middle Aged, Prosthesis Implantation, Uveitis, Postoperative Complications, Treatment Outcome, Case-Control Studies, Chronic Disease, Humans, Female, Glaucoma Drainage Implants, Intraoperative Complications, Antihypertensive Agents, Glaucoma, Open-Angle, Intraocular Pressure, Aged

  • 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).
    57
    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 10%
    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!
57
Top 10%
Top 10%
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!