Journal of Current Glaucoma Practice

Register      Login

VOLUME 16 , ISSUE 1 ( January-April, 2022 ) > List of Articles


A Pilot Study Assessing Treatment Outcomes in Neovascular Glaucoma Using Ahmed Glaucoma Valve with and without Cyclophotocoagulation

Richard L Ford, O Rese J Knight, Meredith R Klifto, Alice Yang Zhang, Christopher A Wiesen, David Fleischman

Keywords : Ahmed glaucoma valve, Cyclophotocoagulation, Hypertensive phase, Intraocular pressure, Neovascular glaucoma, Retrospective pilot cohort study

Citation Information : Ford RL, Knight OJ, Klifto MR, Zhang AY, Wiesen CA, Fleischman D. A Pilot Study Assessing Treatment Outcomes in Neovascular Glaucoma Using Ahmed Glaucoma Valve with and without Cyclophotocoagulation. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2022; 16 (1):4-10.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1358

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 03-05-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Purpose: The purpose of this retrospective pilot study was to examine the short-term effect of simultaneous Ahmed Glaucoma Valve implantation and cyclophotocoagulation on postoperative outcomes in patients with neovascular glaucoma. Methods and materials: Patient charts were selected for inclusion in this study if they carried a diagnosis of neovascular glaucoma and underwent Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation only, Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation with cyclophotocoagulation, or cyclophotocoagulation only. A total of 55 eyes of 54 patients were selected for data collection and analysis. Main outcome measures included 1-, 3-, and 6-month intraocular pressure and occurrence of the hypertensive phase. Other outcomes included visual acuity, surgical complication rate, and a number of 6-month postoperative ophthalmic medications. Results: A significantly lower intraocular pressure was seen in the group that received Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation + cyclophotocoagulation compared to the Ahmed glaucoma valve-only group at 3 and 6 months (p = 0.03 and <0.001, respectively). The difference in the occurrence of the hypertensive phase between the Ahmed glaucoma valve-only group and the Ahmed glaucoma valve + cyclophotocoagulation group approached but did not reach significance (p = 0.052). A significantly lower intraocular pressure was also seen in the cyclophotocoagulation-only group compared to the Ahmed glaucoma valve-only group at 3 months (p = 0.006). Conclusion: Simultaneous Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation and cyclophotocoagulation significantly lowered intraocular pressure at 3 and 6 months compared to Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation alone in patients with neovascular glaucoma. Clinical significance: Neovascular glaucoma is difficult to manage medically and surgically. When surgery is performed, intraocular pressure often remains elevated postoperatively despite aggressive medical management. This study examines a novel method to lower intraocular pressure after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation in patients with neovascular glaucoma.

PDF Share
  1. Shchomak Z, Sousa DC, Leal I, et al. Surgical treatment of neovascular glaucoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2019;257(6):1079–1089. DOI: 10.1007/s00417-019-04256-8
  2. Yildirim N, Yalvac IS, Sahin A, et al. A comparative study between diode laser cyclophotocoagulation and the Ahmed Glaucoma Valve implant in neovascular glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2009;18(3):192–196. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e31817d235c
  3. Coleman AL, Hill R, Wilson MR, et al. Initial clinical experience with the Ahmed glaucoma valve implant. Am J Ophthalmol 1995;120(1):23–31. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(14)73755-9
  4. Won HJ, Sung KR. Hypertensive phase following silicone plate Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation. J Glaucoma 2016;25(4):e313– e317. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000249
  5. Nouri-Mahdavi K, Caprioli J. Evaluation of the hypertensive phase after insertion of the Ahmed glaucoma valve. Am J Ophthalmol 2003;136(6):1001–1008. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(03)00630-5
  6. Ayyala RS, Zurakowski D, Smith JA, et al. A clinical study of the Ahmed glaucoma valve implant in advanced glaucoma. Ophthalmology 1998;105(10):1968–1976. DOI: 10.1016/S0161-6420(98)91049-1
  7. Pakravan M, Rad SS, Yazdani S, et al. Effect of early treatment with aqueous suppressants on Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation outcomes. Ophthalmology 2014;121(9):1693–1698. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.03.014
  8. Law SK, Kornmann HL, Giaconi JA, et al. Early aqueous suppressant therapy on hypertensive phase following glaucoma drainage device procedure. J Glaucoma 2016;25(3):248–257. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000131
  9. Faragione RA, Tansuebchueasai N, Lee R, et al. Etiology and management of the hypertensive phase in glaucoma drainage-device surgery. Surv Ophthalmol 2018;64((2019)):217–224. DOI: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2018.10.008
  10. Jung KI, Park H, Jung Y et al. Serial changes in the bleb wall after glaucoma drainage implant surgery: characteristics during the hypertensive phase. Acta Ophthalmol 2015;93(4):248–253 DOI: 10.1111/aos.12571
  11. Molteno AC, Fucik M, Dempster AG, et al. Otago glaucoma surgery outcome study: factors controlling capsule fibrosis around Molteno implants with histopathological correlation. Ophthalmology 2003;110(11):2198–2206 DOI: 10.1016/S0161-6420(03)00803-0
  12. Freedman J, Iserovich P. Pro-inflammatory cytokines in glaucomatous aqueous and encysted Molteno implant blebs and their relationship to pressure. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2013;54(7):4851–4855. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.13-12274
  13. Canadanovic V, Tusek-Ljesevic L, Miljkovic A, et al. Effect of diode laser cyclophotocoagulation in treatment of patients with refractory glaucoma. Vojnosanit Pregl 2015;72(1):16–20. DOI: 10.2298/vsp1501016c
  14. Shields MB. Diode laser transscleral cyclophotocoagulation as a primary surgical treatment for primary open-angle glaucoma. Evidence-Based Eye Care 2001;2(4):238–239. DOI: 10.1097/00132578-200110000-00026
  15. Sapienza JS, Woerdt AVD. Combined transscleral diode laser cyclophotocoagulation and Ahmed gonioimplantation in dogs with primary glaucoma: 51 cases (1996–2004). Vet Ophthalmol 2005;8(2):121–127. DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-5224.2005.00356.x
  16. Shields SR, Chen P. Sequential or simultaneous cyclophotocoagulation and glaucoma drainage implant for refractory glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2002;11(3):203–208. DOI: 10.1097/00061198-200206000-00007
  17. Ayyala RS, Zurakowski D, Monshizadeh R, et al. Comparison of double-plate Molteno and Ahmed glaucoma valve in patients with advanced uncontrolled glaucoma. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers 2002;33(2):94–101.
  18. Tsai JC, Johnson CC, Dietrich MS. The Ahmed shunt versus the Baerveldt shunt for refractory glaucoma: a single surgeon comparison of outcome. Ophthalmology 2003;110(9):1814–1821. DOI: 10.1016/S0161-6420(03)00574-8
  19. Freigassner P, Eckhardt M. Transscleral cyclophotocoagulation versus cyclocryotherapy in treatment of neovascular glaucoma: a retrospective analysis. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2003;81(6):674–675. DOI: 10.1111/j.1395-3907.2003.00187.x
  20. Ness PJ, Khaimi MA, Feldman RM, et al. Intermediate term safety and efficacy of transscleral cyclophotocoagulation after tube shunt failure. J Glaucoma 2012;21(2):83–88. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e31820bd1ce
  21. Wang MY, Patel K, Blieden LS, et al. Comparison of efficacy and complications of cyclophotocoagulation and second glaucoma drainage device after initial glaucoma drainage device failure. J Glaucoma 2017;26(11):1010–1018. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000766
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.