Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Newer Surgical Options for Glaucoma

  • Ocular Infections (B Jeng and L Schocket, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Ophthalmology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Conventional filtering surgeries such as trabeculectomy and tube-shunt surgery have traditionally been considered the gold standard for management of glaucoma. However, they have a significant complication profile due to the invasive nature of the surgery, and have a relatively high risk of failure such as exuberant fibrotic responses leading to obstruction of the created outflow system. Due to these limitations of traditional incisional surgeries, new surgical techniques for management of glaucoma are of particular interest, especially in the setting of increasing prevalence of glaucoma with an aging population. These new procedures target either inflow or outflow system of the eye in order to manage the intraocular pressure (IOP). The recent innovative techniques share a common goal of effective intraocular pressure control while decreasing the complication profile and minimizing failure rate. This article reviews the primary challenges of developing a successful glaucoma surgery and the recent advancements in glaucoma laser and surgeries.

Recent Findings

Recent surgical modalities have been designed to target eye inflow or outflow system. The advancements in their designs are based on detailed knowledge about eye fluidic system. These new developments have been associated with higher success rate and lower complications. More detailed investigations are currently being conducted regarding the long-term safety and repeatability of these interventions.

Summary

Advanced surgical modalities have shown promising results in modulating IOP, minimizing the complications, lessening the exaggerated inflammatory-fibrotic response, and reducing the number of post-surgical medications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published within the annual period of review, have been highlighted as: • Kof special interest •• Of outstanding interest

  1. Quigley HA, Broman AT. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90(3):262–7. doi:10.1136/bjo.2005.081224.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Tham Y, Li X, Wong TY, Quigley HA, Aung T, Cheng C. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(11):2081–90. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.05.013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Friedman DS, Wolfs RC, O’Colmain BJ, Klein BE, Taylor HR, West S, et al. Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma among adults in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004;122(4):532–8. doi:10.1001/archopht.122.4.532.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Friedman DS, Jampel HD, Munoz B, West SK. The prevalence of open-angle glaucoma among blacks and whites 73 years and older: the Salisbury eye evaluation glaucoma study. Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124(11):1625–30. doi:10.1001/archopht.124.11.1625.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Leske MC, Heijl A, Hussein M, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Komaroff E. Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the early manifest glaucoma trial. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121(1):48–56. doi:10.1001/archopht.121.1.48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gedde SJ, Schiffman JC, Feuer WJ, Herndon LW, Brandt JD, Budenz DL, 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Christakis PG, Tsai JC, Kalenak JW, Zurakowski D, Cantor LB, Kammer JA, et al. The Ahmed versus Baerveldt study: three-year treatment outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2013;120(11):2232–40. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.04.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. •• Arora, Karun S., Alan L.Robin, Kevin J.Corcoran, Suzanne L.Corcoran, and Pradeep Y.Ramulu. Use of various glaucoma surgeries and procedures in Medicare beneficiaries from 1994 to 2012. Ophthalmology 122 2015. Doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.04.015 This study demonstrates the significant reduction in trabeculectomy usage among various glaucoma surgeries.

  9. Murphy C, Ogston S, Cobb C, MacEwen C. Recent trends in glaucoma surgery in Scotland, England and Wales. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99(3):308–12. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-304465.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Desai MA, Gedde SJ, Feuer WJ, Shi W, Chen PP, Parrish II RK. Practice preferences for glaucoma surgery: a survey of the American Glaucoma Society in 2008. Ophthalmic Surgery, Lasers & Imaging Retina. 2011;42(3):202. doi:10.3928/15428877-20110224-04.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Spaeth GL, Cvintal V, Figueiredo A. Is there a need for new surgical procedures for glaucoma? Yes! The open ophthalmology journal 2015;9(1). Doi: 10.2174/1874364101509010101

  12. •• Nardi M, Casini G, Guidi G, Figus M. Emerging surgical therapy in the treatment of glaucoma. Prog Brain Res. 2015;221:341–57. doi:10.1016/bs.pbr.2015.06.011. This article provides comprehensive knowledge about recent surgical modalities based on most recent findings

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Francis BA, Winarko J. Ab interno Schlemm’s canal surgery: trabectome and i-stent. Dev Ophthalmol. 2012;50:125–36. doi:10.1159/000334794.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kaplowitz K, Bussel II, Honkanen R, Schuman JS, Loewen NA. Review and meta-analysis of ab-interno trabeculectomy outcomes. Br J Ophthalmol. 2016;100(5):594–600. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307131.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yildirim, Yildiray, Taner Kar, Eyup Duzgun, Sercan Koray Sagdic, Ali Ayata, and Melih Hamdi Unal. Evaluation of the long-term results of trabectome surgery. nternational ophthalmology 2016:(2016): 1–8. Doi: 10.1007/s10792-016-0190-y

  16. Akil, Handan, Vikas Chopra, Alex Huang, Nils Loewen, Jonathan Noguchi, and Brian A. Francis. Clinical results of ab interno trabeculotomy using the trabectome in patients with pigmentary glaucoma compared to primary open angle glaucoma. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2016. Doi:10.1111/ceo.12737

  17. Bussel II, Kaplowitz K, Schuman JS, Loewen NA, Trabectome Study Group. Outcomes of ab interno trabeculectomy with the trabectome after failed trabeculectomy. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99(2):258–62. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305577.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Au L. Are newer surgical interventions for glaucoma making a difference? Br J Ophthalmol. 2014;98(1):1–2. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-303681.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Arriola-Villalobos P, Martinez-de-la-Casa JM, Diaz-Valle D, Fernandez-Perez C, Garcia-Sanchez J, Garcia-Feijoo J. Combined iStent trabecular micro-bypass stent implantation and phacoemulsification for coexistent open-angle glaucoma and cataract: a long-term study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2012;96(5):645–9. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2011-300218.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Belovay GW, Naqi A, Chan BJ, Rateb M, Ahmed IIK. Using multiple trabecular micro-bypass stents in cataract patients to treat open-angle glaucoma. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2012;38(11):1911–7. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2012.07.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Samuelson TW, Katz LJ, Wells JM, Duh Y, Giamporcaro JE. Randomized evaluation of the trabecular micro-bypass stent with phacoemulsification in patients with glaucoma and cataract. Ophthalmology. 2011;118(3):459–67. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.07.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bahler CK, Hann CR, Fjield T, Haffner D, Heitzmann H, Fautsch MP. Second-generation trabecular meshwork bypass stent (iStent inject) increases outflow facility in cultured human anterior segments. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;153(6):1206–13. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2011.12.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Fea AM, Belda JI, Rękas M, Jünemann A, Chang L, Pablo L, et al. Prospective unmasked randomized evaluation of the iStent inject (®) versus two ocular hypotensive agents in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. 2014. Doi:10.2147/OPTH.S59932

  24. Voskanyan L, García-Feijoó J, Belda JI, Fea A, Jünemann A, Baudouin C. Prospective, unmasked evaluation of the iStent® inject system for open-angle glaucoma: synergy trial. Adv Ther. 2014;31(2):189–201. doi:10.1007/s12325-014-0095-y.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Patel I, Klerk TA, Au L. Manchester iStent study: early results from a prospective UK case series. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2013;41(7):648–52. doi:10.1111/ceo.12098.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Budenz DL, Gedde SJ. New options for combined cataract and glaucoma surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2014;25(2):141–7. doi:10.1097/ICU.0000000000000027.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Craven ER, Katz LJ, Wells JM, Giamporcaro JE, iStent Study Group. Cataract surgery with trabecular micro-bypass stent implantation in patients with mild-to-moderate open-angle glaucoma and cataract: two-year follow-up. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2012;38(8):1339–45. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2012.03.025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Twelve-month outcomes following ab interno implantation of suprachoroidal stent and postoperative administration of travoprost to treat open angle glaucoma. Amsterdam, Netherlands: 31st Congress of the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons; 2013.

  29. New Way for Ab Interno Trabeculotomy: Initial Results. 2015 ASCRS ASOA Symposium and Congress: Ascrs; 2015.

  30. Grierson I, Saheb H, Kahook MY, Johnstone MA, Ahmed II, Schieber AT, et al. A novel Schlemm’s canal scaffold: histologic observations. J Glaucoma. 2015;24(6):460–8. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000000012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fea AM, Ahmed IIK, Lavia C, Mittica P, Consolandi G, Motolese I, et al. Hydrus microstent compared to selective laser trabeculoplasty in primary open angle glaucoma: one year results. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2016; doi:10.1111/ceo.12805.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Seibold LK, SooHoo JR, Ammar DA, Kahook MY. Preclinical investigation of ab interno trabeculectomy using a novel dual-blade device. Am J Ophthalmol. 2013;155(3):524–529. e2. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2012.09.023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kahook MY. Modified dual-blade cutting system 2013.

  34. Grover DS, Godfrey DG, Smith O, Feuer WJ, de Oca IM, Fellman RL. Gonioscopy-assisted transluminal trabeculotomy, ab interno trabeculotomy: technique report and preliminary results. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(4):855–61. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.11.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tetz M, Koerber N, Shingleton BJ, von Wolff K, Bull H, Samuelson TW, et al. Phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation before, during, or after canaloplasty in eyes with open-angle glaucoma: 3-year results. J Glaucoma. 2015;24(3):187–94. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e318285ff13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Lewis RA, von Wolff K, Tetz M, Koerber N, Kearney JR, Shingleton BJ, et al. Canaloplasty: three-year results of circumferential viscodilation and tensioning of Schlemm canal using a microcatheter to treat open-angle glaucoma. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2011;37(4):682–90. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.10.055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Bull H, von Wolff K, Körber N, Tetz M. Three-year canaloplasty outcomes for the treatment of open-angle glaucoma: European study results. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011;249(10):1537–45. doi:10.1007/s00417-011-1728-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Grieshaber MC, Stegmann R, Grieshaber HR, Meyer P. Novel device for expanding Schlemm’s canal: a morphological study implantation of the Stegmann Canal expander following viscodilation of Schlemm’s canal resulted in permanent expansion of the canal lumen and distension of the trabecular meshwork without complications. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99(7):875–7. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305540.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Grieshaber MC, Grieshaber HR, Stegmann R. A new expander for Schlemm Canal surgery in primary open-angle glaucoma-interim clinical results. J Glaucoma. 2016;25(8):657–62. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000000397.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Toris CB, Pederson JE. Effect of intraocular pressure on uveoscleral outflow following cyclodialysis in the monkey eye. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1985;26(12):1745–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Saheb H, Ianchulev T, Ahmed II. Optical coherence tomography of the suprachoroid after CyPass Micro-Stent implantation for the treatment of open-angle glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2014;98(1):19–23. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2012-302951.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Hoeh H, Vold SD, Ahmed IK, Anton A, Rau M, Singh K, et al. Initial clinical experience with the CyPass Micro-Stent: safety and surgical outcomes of a novel supraciliary microstent. J Glaucoma. 2016;25(1):106–12. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000000134.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. István C, Péter V, Mária B. Starflo glaucoma implant: early experience in Hungary. Romanian journal of ophthalmology. 2016;60(1):14–7.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Pourjavan, Sayeh, Nathalie J.M. Collignon, Veva De Groot, Rich A. Eiferman, Andrew J. Marshall, and Cecile J. Roy. STARfloTM: A Suprachoroidal Drainage Implant Made from STAR® Biomaterial. In Surgical Innovations in Glaucoma Springer New York,; 2014. p. pp. 235–251. Doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-8348-9_22

  45. Dahan E, Carmichael TR. Implantation of a miniature glaucoma device under a scleral flap. J Glaucoma. 2005;14(2):98–102. doi:10.1097/01.ijg.0000151688.34904.b7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Sugiyama T, Shibata M, Kojima S, Ueki M, Ikeda T. The first report on intermediate-term outcome of Ex-PRESS glaucoma filtration device implanted under scleral flap in Japanese patients. Clin Ophthalmol. 2011;5:1063–6. doi:10.2147/opth.s23129.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Wagschal LD, Trope GE, Jinapriya D, Jin YP, Buys YM. Prospective randomized study comparing Ex-PRESS to trabeculectomy: 1-year results. J Glaucoma. 2015;24(8):624–9. doi:10.1097/ijg.0000000000000029.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Batlle JF, Fantes F, Riss I, Pinchuk L, Alburquerque R, Kato YP, et al. Three-year follow-up of a novel aqueous humor MicroShunt. J Glaucoma. 2016;25(2):e58–65. doi:10.1097/ijg.0000000000000368.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Lewis RA. Ab interno approach to the subconjunctival space using a collagen glaucoma stent. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2014;40(8):1301–6. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.01.032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Sheybani A, Lenzhofer M, Hohensinn M, Reitsamer H, Ahmed IIK. Phacoemulsification combined with a new ab interno gel stent to treat open-angle glaucoma: pilot study. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2015;41(9):1905–9. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.01.019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Krasnov M. Laseropuncture of anterior chamber angle in glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1973;75(4):674–8. doi:10.1016/0002-9394(73)90819-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Beckman H, Kinoshita A, Rota AN, Sugar HS. Transscleral ruby laser irradiation of the ciliary body in the treatment of intractable glaucoma. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol. 1972;76(2):423–36. doi:10.1016/0002-9394(84)90699-8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Pastor SA, Singh K, Lee DA, Juzych MS, Lin SC, Netland PA, et al. Cyclophotocoagulation: a report by the american academy of ophthalmology 11 prepared by the Ophthalmic Technology Assessment Committee Glaucoma Panel and approved by the American Academy of Ophthalmology’s Board of Trustees August 1, 2001. Ophthalmology. 2001;108(11):2130–8. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(01)00889-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Schuman JS, Bellows AR, Shingleton BJ, Latina MA, Allingham RR, Belcher CD, et al. Contact transscleral Nd: YAG laser cyclophotocoagulation: midterm results. Ophthalmology. 1992;99(7):1089–95. doi:10.1016/s0161-6420(92)31846-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Kosoko O, Gaasterland DE, Pollack IP, Enger CL. Long-term outcome of initial ciliary ablation with contact diode laser transscleral cyclophotocoagulation for severe glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1996;103(8):1294–302. doi:10.1016/s0161-6420(96)30508-3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Kremmer S, Anastassiou G, Schallenberg M, Steuhl K. Laser cyclophotocoagulation enhances the regulative capacity of retinal vessels in glaucoma. The open ophthalmology journal 2014;8(1). Doi:10.2174/1874364101408010032

  57. Flammer J. To what extent are vascular factors involved in the pathogenesis of glaucoma? Ocular blood flow: Karger Publishers; 1996. p. 12–39. Doi:10.1159/000425030

  58. Schlote T, Derse M, Rassmann K, Nicaeus T, Dietz K, Thiel H. Efficacy and safety of contact transscleral diode laser cyclophotocoagulation for advanced glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2001;10(4):294–301. doi:10.1136/bjo.84.9.999.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Mistlberger A, Liebmann JM, Tschiderer H, Ritch R, Ruckhofer J, Grabner G. Diode laser transscleral cyclophotocoagulation for refractory glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2001;10(4):288–93. doi:10.1097/00061198-200108000-00008.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Uram M. Combined phacoemulsification, endoscopic ciliary process photocoagulation, and intraocular lens implantation in glaucoma management. Ophthalmic Surgery, Lasers and Imaging Retina. 1995;26(4):346–52. doi:10.3928/1542-8877-19950701-17.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Kaplowitz K, Kuei A, Klenofsky B, Abazari A, Honkanen R. The use of endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation for moderate to advanced glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol. 2015;93(5):395–401. doi:10.1111/aos.12529.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Gayton JL, Van Der Karr M, Sanders V. Combined cataract and glaucoma surgery: trabeculectomy versus endoscopic laser cycloablation. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 1999;25(9):1214–9. doi:10.1016/S0886-3350(99)00141-8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Kahook MY, Lathrop KL, Noecker RJ. One-site versus two-site endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation. J Glaucoma. 2007;16(6):527–30. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e3180575215.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Lin SC. Endoscopic and transscleral cyclophotocoagulation for the treatment of refractory glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2008;17(3):238–47. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e31815f2539.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Tan JC, Francis BA, Noecker R, Uram M, Dustin L, Chopra V. Endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation and pars plana ablation (ECP-plus) to treat refractory glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2016;25(3):e117–22. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000000278.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Lima FE, Magacho L, Carvalho DM, Susanna Jr R, Ávila MP. A prospective, comparative study between endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation and the Ahmed drainage implant in refractory glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2004;13(3):233–7. doi:10.1097/00061198-200406000-00011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. SELECTIVE RPE DAMAGE BY MICRO-PULSE DIODE-LASER PHOTOCOAGULATION. INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE: LIPPINCOTT-RAVEN PUBL 227 EAST WASHINGTON SQ, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106; 1992.

  68. Sivaprasad S, Sandhu R, Tandon A, Sayed-Ahmed K, McHugh DA. Subthreshold micropulse diode laser photocoagulation for clinically significant diabetic macular oedema: a three-year follow up. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2007;35(7):640–4. doi:10.1111/j.1442-9071.2007.01566.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Parodi MB, Spasse S, Iacono P, Di Stefano G, Canziani T, Ravalico G. Subthreshold grid laser treatment of macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion with micropulse infrared (810 nanometer) diode laser. Ophthalmology. 2006;113(12):2237–42. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.05.056.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Pollack JS, Kim JE, Pulido JS, Burke JM. Tissue effects of subclinical diode laser treatment of the retina. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116(12):1633–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Ingvoldstad D, Krishna R, Willoughby L. Micropulse diode laser trabeculoplasty versus argon laser trabeculoplasty in the treatment of open angle glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46(13):123-123. doi:10.1001/archopht.116.12.1633.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Rantala E, Välimäki J. Micropulse diode laser trabeculoplasty—180-degree treatment. Acta Ophthalmol. 2012;90(5):441–4. doi:10.1111/j.1755-3768.2010.02026.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Fudemberg S, Myers J, Katz L. Trabecular meshwork tissue examination with scanning electron microscopy: a comparison of micropulse diode laser (MLT), selective laser (SLT), and argon laser (ALT) trabeculoplasty in human cadaver tissue. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49(13):1236-1236.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Liu G, Mizukawa A, Okisaka S. Mechanism of intraocular pressure decrease after contact transscleral continuous-wave Nd: YAG laser cyclophotocoagulation. Ophthalmic Res. 1994;26(2):65–79. doi:10.1159/000267395.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Luttrull JK, Musch DC, Mainster MA. Subthreshold diode micropulse photocoagulation for the treatment of clinically significant diabetic macular oedema. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89(1):74–80. doi:10.1136/bjo.2004.051540.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Tan AM, Chockalingam M, Aquino MC, Lim ZI, See JL, Chew PT. Micropulse transscleral diode laser cyclophotocoagulation in the treatment of refractory glaucoma. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2010;38(3):266–72. doi:10.1111/j.1442-9071.2010.02238.x.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Aquino MCD, Barton K, Tan AMW, Sng C, Li X, Loon SC, et al. Micropulse versus continuous wave transscleral diode cyclophotocoagulation in refractory glaucoma: a randomized exploratory study. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2015;43(1):40–6. doi:10.1111/ceo.12360.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Kuchar S, Moster MR, Reamer CB, Waisbourd M. Treatment outcomes of micropulse transscleral cyclophotocoagulation in advanced glaucoma. Lasers Med Sci. 2016;31(2):393–6. doi:10.1007/s10103-015-1856-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Coleman DJ, Lizzi FL, Driller J, Rosado AL, Chang S, Iwamoto T, et al. Therapeutic ultrasound in the treatment of glaucoma: I. Experimental model. Ophthalmology. 1985;92(3):339–46. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(85)34028-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Charrel T, Aptel F, Birer A, Chavrier F, Romano F, Chapelon J, et al. Development of a miniaturized HIFU device for glaucoma treatment with conformal coagulation of the ciliary bodies. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2011;37(5):742–54. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2011.01.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Denis P, Aptel F, Rouland J, Nordmann J, Lachkar Y, Renard J, et al. Cyclocoagulation of the ciliary bodies by high-intensity focused ultrasound: a 12-month multicenter study glaucoma treatment with HIFU. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015;56(2):1089–96. doi:10.1167/iovs.14-14973.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Melamed S, Goldenfeld M, Cotlear D, Skaat A, Moroz I. High-intensity focused ultrasound treatment in refractory glaucoma patients: results at 1 year of prospective clinical study. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2015;25(6):483–9. doi:10.5301/ejo.5000620.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Aptel F, Charrel T, Lafon C, Romano F, Chapelon J, Blumen-Ohana E, et al. Miniaturized high-intensity focused ultrasound device in patients with glaucoma: a clinical pilot study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(12):8747–53. doi:10.1167/iovs.11-8137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, Box 0730, 10 Koret Street, San Francisco, CA, 94143-0730, USA

    Behzad Amoozgar, Ingrid Chang, Jane Kuo & Ying Han

Authors
  1. Behzad Amoozgar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ingrid Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jane Kuo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ying Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ying Han.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Jane Kuo, Behzad Amoozgar, Ingrid Chang, and Ying Han declare no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Amoozgar, B., Chang, I., Kuo, J. et al. Newer Surgical Options for Glaucoma. Curr Ophthalmol Rep 5, 58–66 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40135-017-0121-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40135-017-0121-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation