Endothelial cell damage: anterior chamber vs ciliary sulcus Ahmed glaucoma valve tube placement

Session Details

Session Title: Cornea & Miscellaneous
Session Date/Time: Friday 15/02/2019 | 10:30-12:30
Paper Time: 10:36
Venue: Room MC3

First Author: C.Oliveira-Ferreira PORTUGAL
Co Author(s): S. Perestrelo  S. Estrela-Silva  A. Benevides-Melo  J. Tavares-Ferreira  F. Falcao-Reis  J. Barbosa-Breda  

Abstract Details

Purpose:

Since there are no studies on the comparison and complications between these two options and at the same time an endothelial cell profile analysis, the objective is to compare endothelial damage after the implementation of Ahmed Glaucoma Valve (AGV) with tube placement in the anterior chamber (AC) or ciliary sulcus (CS).

Setting:

Centro Hospitalar São Joao, Porto, Portugal, between January 2015 and July 2017.

Methods:

Prospective study of patients who underwent AGV placement. The location of the tube was chosen according to the preference of the surgeon. Patients data were collected preoperatively, and postoperatively at 1, 6 and 12 months through glaucoma surgeon’s evaluation [Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), number of different classes of glaucoma medications, intraocular pressure (IOP), postoperative complications] and non-contact specular microscope evaluation. Primary outcomes were determined 12 months after surgery: endothelial cell count (ECC) and morphology (polymorphism and polymegatism), success rates, IOP, number of different classes of glaucoma medications and postoperative complications rates.

Results:

Sample with 28 eyes, 17 placed the tube in AC and 11 in CS, without intraoperative complications.Early/late postoperative complications were similar (p=0.129). At 12-months, all patients achieved therapeutic success without differences between groups (p=0.125).Postoperative IOP decreased to 11.79±3.18 mmHg, being similar in both groups (p=0.429).Although IOP reduction rate was higher in the CS group (AC vs CS: 56.55% vs 61.13%), this wasn’t significant (p=0.275). ECC showed a mean reduction of 321.97±302.11 cells/mm2 (p=0.151). Rate of ECC reduction was 15.42% (p=0.100). Rate of variation of hexagonal cells percentage and coefficient of variation didn’t differ (p=0.575 and p=0.173).

Conclusions:

Placement of AGV in AC or CS does not show significant differences in surgical success, complication rate, or endothelial cell density and morphology 12 months after surgery

Financial Disclosure:

-