Citation Information :
Berman T, Au L. A New “Tube-in-tube” Method to Extend Glaucoma Drainage Devices Using Paul Glaucoma Implant. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2024; 18 (3):130-133.
Aim and background: To describe a novel and uncomplicated technique of elongating the tubing of a glaucoma drainage device (GDD) sourced from a segment of the tube from a Paul® Glaucoma Implant (PGI).
Surgical technique: Conjunctival and Tenon's peritomy are performed with relaxing incisions to expose the original tube. The original tube is then removed from the anterior chamber, and the original entry site is closed. The tip of the original Baerveldt/Ahmed tubing is shortened to near the plate, and the lumen is stretched open using Burke's forceps (nontoothed to avoid damage to the tubing) while the appropriate length of the Paul tube was being pushed inside and is secure without the need for any suturing. The new smaller Paul tube is then inserted back into the anterior chamber using a 26-gauge tract. An 8-0 Ethilon® was then used to secure the tube to the sclera, and TISSEL® was used to secure it (Baxter, United States). Depending on the positioning, either the original Tutoplast® pericardium or new double-layered Tutoplast® can be placed over the tube to prevent erosion. The Tenon's and conjunctiva were then closed to secure the conjunctival and Tenon's back in their original position at the limbus, and the radial conjunctival incisions can be closed using TISSEL® fibrin glue or further sutures if required.
Conclusion: This method offers several benefits over previously documented techniques; it avoids significant bulkiness, and the elongated tube conforms to the curvature of the globe owing to the suitable rigidity of the extended section. The additional tubing segment fits securely without the need for sutures. Introducing a smaller diameter tube into the anterior chamber in comparison to other GDDs minimizes the surface area between the tube and corneal endothelium, therefore decreasing the rate of potential endothelium cell loss.
Clinical significance: This novel “tube-in-tube” technique is efficient, safe, and straightforward to perform. It eliminates the need for alterations in glaucoma medication since the PGI is not thought to offer any flow resistance.
Gedde SJ, Schiffman JC, Feuer WJ, et al. Treatment outcomes in the tube versus trabeculectomy (TVT) study after five years of follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol 2012;153(5):789–803.e2. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2011.10.026
Chadha N, Liu J, Teng CC. Resident and fellow glaucoma surgical experience following the tube versus trabeculectomy study. Ophthalmology 2015;122(9):1953–1954. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.03.009
Jayaram H, Strouthidis NG, Gazzard G. The COVID-19 pandemic will redefine the future delivery of glaucoma care. Eye 2020;34(7):1203–1205. DOI: 10.1038/s41433-020-0958-1
Husain R, Zhang X, Aung T. Challenges and lessons for managing glaucoma during COVID-19 pandemic: perspectives from Asia. Ophthalmology 2020;127(9):e63–e64. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.05.042
Tan AN, Webers CA, Berendschot TT, et al. Corneal endothelial cell loss after Baerveldt glaucoma drainage device implantation in the anterior chamber. Acta Ophthalmol 2017;95(1):91–96. DOI: 10.1111/aos.13161
Tello C, Espana EM, Mora R, et al. Baerveldt glaucoma implant insertion in the posterior chamber sulcus. Br J Ophthalmol 2007;91(6):739–742. DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2006.107839
Rumelt S, Rehany U. Implantation of glaucoma drainage implant tube into the ciliary sulcus in patients with corneal transplants. Arch Ophthalmol 1998;116(5):685–687. DOI: 10.1001/archopht.116.5.685
Billson F, Thomas R, Grigg J. Resiting Molteno implant tubes. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers 1996;27(9):801–803. DOI: 10.3928/1542-8877-19960901-15
Sarkisian SR, Netland PA. Tube extender for revision of glaucoma drainage implants. J Glaucoma 2007;16(7):637–639. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e3180640f6c
Merrill KD, Suhr AW, Lim MC. Long-term success in the correction of exposed glaucoma drainage tubes with a tube extender. Am J Ophthalmol 2007;144(1):136–137. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.03.017
Rebolleda G, Muñoz-Negrete FJ. Extender-tube for Ahmed glaucoma valve implant. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol 2003;78(9):513–515. DOI: 10.4321/s0365-66912003000900010
Moghimi S, Mohammadi M. Extension of a retracted ciliary sulcus tube of Ahmed glaucoma implant with angiocatheter segment. Int Ophthalmol 2012;32(4):409–412. DOI: 10.1007/s10792-012-9576-7
Mustafa MS, Azuara-Blanco A. Surgical technique: complex glaucoma case requiring Molteno drainage tube extension. Clin Ophthalmol 2011;5:307–310. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S14844
Bansal A, Fenerty CH. Extension of retracted glaucoma drainage tube using a 22-gauge intravenous catheter in complex paediatric glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2010;19(4):248–251. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181a98bc5
Fechter H, Sarkisian S, Budenz D, et al. How do I extend a tube? Glaucoma Today 2009;1:37–40. https://assets.bmctoday.net/glaucomatoday/pdfs/GT0109_09.pdf
Godfrey DG, Krishna R, Greenfield DS, et al. Implantation of second glaucoma drainage devices after failure of primary devices. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers 2002;33(1):37–43. DOI: 10.1097/00061198-200002000-00040
Smith MF, Doyle JW. Results of another modality for extending glaucoma drainage tubes. J Glaucoma 1999;8(5):310–314. DOI: 10.1097/00061198-199910000-00007
Chiang MY, Camuglia JE, Khaw PT. A novel method of extending glaucoma drainage tube: “tube-in-tube” technique. J Glaucoma 2017;26(2):93–95. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000567
D'Alessandro E, Guidotti JM, Mansouri K, et al. XEN-augmented Baerveldt: a new surgical technique for refractory glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2017;26(2):e90–e92. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000562
Sng CCA, Wang J, Barton K. Caution in using the XEN-augmented Baerveldt surgical technique. J Glaucoma 2017;26(11):e257. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000637
Fritsche R, Müller L, Bochmann F. Novel surgical techniques to control flow with Preserflo Microshunt for late hypotony after Baerveldt drainage device implantation. J Glaucoma 2022;31(10):e101–e104. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000002061
