Journal of Current Glaucoma Practice

Register      Login

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 2 ( May-August, 2019 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Evaluation of Early Postoperative Intraocular Pressure for Success after Ex-Press Surgery

Naoki Tojo, Atsushi Hayashi, Mitsuya Otsuka

Keywords : Choroidal detachment, Ex-Press, Target intraocular pressure, Trabeculectomy

Citation Information : Tojo N, Hayashi A, Otsuka M. Evaluation of Early Postoperative Intraocular Pressure for Success after Ex-Press Surgery. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2019; 13 (2):55-61.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1252

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-06-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; The Author(s).


Aim: The aim of this study is to identify target levels of early postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) associated with successful trabeculectomy using an Ex-Press glaucoma shunt. Materials and methods: This was a retrospective single-facility study. We enrolled 158 glaucoma patients who underwent trabeculectomy with Ex-Press and were followed for >1 year, and investigated risk factors for the failure of Ex-Press surgery. We examined age, sex, central corneal thickness (CCT), number of preoperative glaucoma medications, simultaneous performance of cataract surgery, history of trabeculotomy, hypertension (HT), diabetes mellitus (DM), subtype of glaucoma, and early postoperative IOP (minimum, 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months). Results: Ex-Press surgery could significantly decrease IOP. Success rates at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years were 91.1, 86.1, 82.5, and 78.1%, respectively. Factors significantly affecting the success rate included age, the number of preoperative glaucoma medications, and early postoperative IOP. The IOP cutoff values of minimum IOP for the success of Ex-Press surgery was 5 mm Hg. Conclusions: Younger age, a high number of preoperative glaucoma medications, and high IOPs in the early postoperative period were found to be the risk factors for failure of Ex-Press surgery. Considering hypotonic complications, it is desirable to control the minimum IOP from 3–5 mm Hg within 2 weeks after surgery. According to our calculations, target IOPs at 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months after Ex-Press surgery should be 8 mm Hg, 10 mm Hg, and 14 mm Hg, respectively. Clinical significance: We thought that Ex-Press surgery might require lower IOP in the early postoperative period than conventional trabeculectomy.

  1. Sarkisian SR. The ex-press mini glaucoma shunt: technique and experience. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol 2009;16:134–137. DOI: 10.4103/0974-9233.56226.
  2. Rong SS, Meng HL, et al. Can intraoperative intraocular pressure during primary trabeculectomy predict early postoperative pressure? J Glaucoma 2014;23:653–657. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e318285ff44.
  3. Okimoto S, Kiuchi Y, et al. Using the early postoperative intraocular pressure to predict pressure control after a trabeculectomy. J Glaucoma 2014;23:410–414. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e318285fd7d.
  4. Asamoto A, Yablonski ME, et al. Predicting long-term results of trabeculectomy from early postoperative intraocular pressure levels. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers 1996;27:355–360.
  5. Schultz SK, Iverson SM, et al. Safety And Efficacy Of Achieving Single-Digit Intraocular Pressure Targets With Filtration Surgery In Eyes With Progressive Normal-Tension Glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2016;25:217–222. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000145.
  6. Aoyama Y, Murata H, et al. Targeting a low-teen intraocular pressure by trabeculectomy with a fornix-based conjunctival flap: continuous Japanese case series by a single surgeon. J Glaucoma 2015;24: 225–232. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000219.
  7. Iverson SM, Schultz SK, et al. Effectiveness of Single-Digit IOP Targets on Decreasing Global and Localized Visual Field Progression After Filtration Surgery in Eyes With Progressive Normal-Tension Glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2016;25:408–414. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000240.
  8. Dahan E, Ben Simon GJ, et al. Comparison of trabeculectomy and Ex-PRESS implantation in fellow eyes of the same patient: a prospective, randomised study. Eye 2012;26:703–710. DOI: 10.1038/eye.2012.13.
  9. Good TJ, Kahook MY. Assessment of bleb morphologic features and postoperative outcomes after Ex-PRESS drainage device implantation vs trabeculectomy. Am J Ophthalmol 2011;151:507–513 e501. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2010.09.004.
  10. Netland PA, Sarkisian Jr SR, et al. Randomized, prospective, comparative trial of EX-PRESS glaucoma filtration device vs trabeculectomy (XVT study). Am J Ophthalmol 2014;157:433–440 e433. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2013.09.014.
  11. Mariotti C, Dahan E, et al. Long-term outcomes and risk factors for failure with the EX-press glaucoma drainage device. Eye 2014;28:1–8. DOI: 10.1038/eye.2013.234.
  12. Gonzalez-Rodriguez JM, Trope GE, et al. Comparison of trabeculectomy vs Ex-PRESS: 3-year follow-up. Br J Ophthalmol 2016;100:1269–1273. DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307161.
  13. de Jong LA. The Ex-PRESS glaucoma shunt vs trabeculectomy in open-angle glaucoma: a prospective randomized study. Adv Ther 2009;26:336–345. DOI: 10.1007/s12325-009-0017-6.
  14. Lankaranian D, Razeghinejad MR, et al. Intermediate-term results of the Ex-PRESS miniature glaucoma implantunder a scleral flap in previously operated eyes. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2011;39:421–428. DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2010.02481.x.
  15. Landers J, Martin K, et al. A twenty-year follow-up study of trabeculectomy: risk factors and outcomes. Ophthalmology 2012;119:694–702. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.043.
  16. AGIS Investigators. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 11. Risk factors for failure of trabeculectomy and argon laser trabeculoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 2002;134:481–498. DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9394(02)01658-6.
  17. Ogata-Iwao M, Inatani M, et al. A prospective comparison between trabeculectomy with mitomycin C and phacotrabeculectomy with mitomycin C. Acta Ophthalmol 2013;91:e500–e501. DOI: 10.1111/aos.12133.
  18. Ochiai Y, Ochiai H. Higher concentration of transforming growth factor-beta in aqueous humor of glaucomatous eyes and diabetic eyes. Jpn J Ophthalmol 2002;46:249–253. DOI: 10.1016/S0021-5155(01)00523-8.
  19. Min SH, Lee TI, et al. Transforming growth factor-beta levels in human aqueous humor of glaucomatous, diabetic and uveitic eyes. Korean J Ophthalmol 2006;20:162–165. DOI: 10.3341/kjo.2006.20.3.162.
  20. Broadway DC, Chang LP. Trabeculectomy, risk factors for failure and the preoperative state of the conjunctiva. J Glaucoma 2001;10:237–249. DOI: 10.1097/00061198-200106000-00017.
  21. Lim SH, Cha SC. Long-term Outcomes of Mitomycin-C Trabeculectomy in Exfoliative Glaucoma Vs Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2017;26:303–310. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000365.
  22. Djordjević-Jocić J, Zlatanovic G, et al. Transforming growth factor beta1, matrix-metalloproteinase-2 and its tissue inhibitor in patients with pseudoexfoliation glaucoma/syndrome. Vojnosanit Pregl 2012;69:231–236. DOI: 10.2298/VSP1203231D.
  23. Sherwood MB, Grierson I, et al. Long-term morphologic effects of antiglaucoma drugs on the conjunctiva and Tenon's capsule in glaucomatous patients. Ophthalmology 1989;96:327–335. DOI: 10.1016/S0161-6420(89)32888-0.
  24. Takihara Y, Inatani M, et al. Trabeculectomy for open-angle glaucoma in phakic eyes vs in pseudophakic eyes after phacoemulsification: a prospective clinical cohort study. Jama Ophthalmol 2014;132:69–76. DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2013.5605.
  25. Fukuchi T, Ueda J, et al. The outcome of mitomycin C trabeculectomy and laser suture lysis depends on postoperative management. Jpn J Ophthalmol 2006;50:455–459. DOI: 10.1007/s10384-006-0346-9.
  26. Cho HK, Kojima S, et al. Effect of laser suture lysis on filtration openings: a prospective three-dimensional anterior segment optical coherence tomography study. Eye 2015;29:1220–1225. DOI: 10.1038/eye.2015.129.
  27. Ralli M, Nouri-Mahdavi K, et al. Outcomes of laser suture lysis after initial trabeculectomy with adjunctive mitomycin C. J Glaucoma 2006;15:60–67. DOI: 10.1097/01.ijg.0000195929.94922.a2.
  28. Kapetansky FM. Laser suture lysis after trabeculectomy. J Glaucoma 2003;12:316–320. DOI: 10.1097/00061198-200308000-00005.
  29. Kromer M, Nolle B, et al. Laser suture lysis after trabeculectomy with mitomycin C: analysis of suture selection. J Glaucoma 2015;24:e84–87. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000144.
  30. Tojo N, Otsuka M, et al. Conventional trabeculectomy vs trabeculectomy with the Ex-PRESS((R)) mini-glaucoma shunt: differences in postoperative interventions. Clin Ophthalmol 2018;12:643–650. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S160342.
  31. Haga A, Inatani M, et al. Risk factors for choroidal detachment after trabeculectomy with mitomycin C. Clin Ophthalmol 2013;7:1417–1421. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S46375.
  32. Altan C, Ozturker C, et al. Post-trabeculectomy choroidal detachment: not an adverse prognostic sign for either visual acuity or surgical success. Eur J Ophthalmol 2008;18:771–777. DOI: 10.1177/112067210801800518.
  33. De Feo F, Bagnis A, et al. Efficacy and safety of a steel drainage device implanted under a scleral flap. Can J Ophthalmol 2009;44:457–462. DOI: 10.3129/i09-120.
  34. Varadaraj V, Sengupta S, et al. Evaluation of Angle Closure as a Risk Factor for Reduced Corneal Endothelial Cell Density. J Glaucoma 2017;26:566–570. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000669.
  35. Law SK, Nguyen AM, et al. Severe loss of central vision in patients with advanced glaucoma undergoing trabeculectomy. Arch Ophthalmol 2007;125:1044–1050. DOI: 10.1001/archopht.125.8.1044.
  36. Costa VP, Smith M, et al. Loss of visual acuity after trabeculectomy. Ophthalmology 1993;100:599–612. DOI: 10.1016/S0161-6420(93) 31597-6.
  37. Benson SE, Mandal K, et al. Is post-trabeculectomy hypotony a risk factor for subsequent failure? A case control study. BMC Ophthalmol 2005;5:7. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2415-5-7.
  38. Tseng VL, Kim CH, et al. Risk Factors and Long-Term Outcomes in Patients with Low Intraocular Pressure after Trabeculectomy. Ophthalmology 2017;124:1457–1465. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.05.014.
  39. Bardak Y, Cuypers MH, et al. Ocular hypotony after laser suture lysis following trabeculectomy with mitomycin C. Int Ophthalmol 1997;21:325–330. DOI: 10.1023/A:1006024522541.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.