Received: 15 February 2021; Published on-line: 30 April 2022
Comparing the efficacy of non-penetrating deep sclerectomy combined with endotrabeculectomy with that of trabeculectomy
I. Ia. Novytskyy, O. V. Levytska
Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University; Lviv (Ukraine)
TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Novytskyy IIa, Levytska OV. Comparing the efficacy of non-penetrating deep sclerectomy combined with endotrabeculectomy with that of trabeculectomy. J.ophthalmol.(Ukraine).2022;2:27-31. http://doi.org/10.31288/oftalmolzh202222731
Purpose: To compare the clinical efficacy of non-penetrating deep sclerectomy (NPDS) combined with ab interno endotrabeculectomy (ETE) with that of penetrating trabeculectomy for primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG).
Material and Methods: Twenty-five patients (25 eyes) that received surgery for POAG were included in the study and divided into two groups based on the type of surgery received: trabeculectomy (13 patients) and NPDS combined with ETE (12 patients).
Results: There was a significant difference (a) between preoperative and any postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) levels, and (b) between preoperative and postoperative mean numbers of ocular hypotensive medications used for either group at any time point of the 12-month follow-up (р < 0.05). In addition, there was no significant difference in IOP between groups (р > 0.05) at any time point. Moreover, there was no significant difference in the number of ocular hypotensive medications used between the groups at any time point.
Conclusion: Not only EDE combined with NPDS has at least the same ocular hypotensive effect as that of trabeculectomy for POAG, but it is also advantageous in a low incidence of severe postoperative complications, which may make it a procedure of choice for POAG.
Keywords: endotrabeculectomy, non-penetrating deep sclerectomy, intraocular pressure, topical ocular hypotensive medications, trabeculectomy
Conflict of Interest Statement. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Funding Support. There are no external sources of funding.
1.Trivili A, Zervou M, Goulielmos GN, et al. Primary open angle glaucoma genetics: The common variants and their clinical associations (Review). Mod Med Rep. 2020 Aug;22(2):1103-10.
2.Sihota R, Angmo D, Ramaswamy D, Fafa T. Simplifying “target” intraocular pressure for different stages of primary open-angle glaucoma and primary angle-closure glaucoma. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2018 Apr;66(4):495-505.
3.Bertaud S, Aragno V, Baudouin C, Labbé A. [Primary open-angle glaucoma]. Rev Med Interne. 2019 Jul;40(7):445-452.
4.Sato T, Hirata A, Mizoguchi T. [Outcomes of 360º suture trabeculotomy with deep sclerectomy combined with cataract surgery for primary open glaucoma]. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014 Jul 11;8:1301-10.
5.Novytskyy IIa. [Modern surgery of primary open-angle glaucoma. Transition to minimally invasive operations]. Lviv: Litopys; 2018: 106–119. Ukrainian.
6.Rabiolo A, Leadbetter D, Alaghband P, Anand N. Primary deep sclerectomy in open-angle glaucoma: long-term outcomes and risk factors for failure. Ophthalmol Glaucoma. 2021;4:149–61.
7.Bendel RE, Patterson M. Long-term Effectiveness of Trabectome (Ab-interno Trabeculectomy) Surgery. J Curr Glaucoma Pract. Sep-Dec 2018;12(3):119-124.
8.Klemm M. [Deep sclerectomy. An alternative to trabeculectomy]. Ophthalmologe. 2015 Apr;112(4):313–18. DOI: 10.1007/s00347-014-3161-6. German