Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Impact of Glaucoma Drainage Devices on the Cornea

  • Diagnosis and Monitoring of Glaucoma (J Kammer, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Ophthalmology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

To discuss the relevant clinical associations between glaucoma drainage device (GDD) implantation and health of the cornea, focusing on corneal endothelial disease and success of viability of keratoplasty.

Recent Findings

Corneal endothelial injury and risk of graft failure continues to demonstrate association with GDD placement; however, newer studies demonstrate improved outcomes associated with Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Additionally, newer adverse effects associated with GDD placement have been described.

Summary

GDD implantation certainly carries risk of endothelial injury and keratoplasty viability, but newer keratoplasty techniques may improve visual outcomes. Furthermore, attention to placement and location of the GDD may affect the risk of progressive corneal injury.

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 recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Arora KS, Robin AL, Corcoran KJ, Corcoran SL, Ramulu PY. Use of various glaucoma surgeries and procedures in Medicare beneficiaries from 1994 to 2012. Ophthalmology. 2015;122(8):1615–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Desai MA, Gedde SJ, Feuer WJ, Shi W, Chen PP, Parrish RK. Practice preferences for glaucoma surgery: a survey of the American Glaucoma Society in 2008. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2011;42(3):202–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hau S, Barton K. Corneal complications of glaucoma surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2009;20(2):131–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gedde SJ, Herndon LW, Brandt JD, et al. Postoperative complications in the Tube Versus Trabeculectomy (TVT) study during five years of follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;153(5):804–814.e801.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Christakis PG, Kalenak JW, Zurakowski D, et al. The Ahmed Versus Baerveldt study: one-year treatment outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2011;118(11):2180–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Christakis PG, Kalenak JW, Tsai JC, et al. The Ahmed Versus Baerveldt study: five-year treatment outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2016;123(10):2093–102.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Budenz DL, Feuer WJ, Barton K, et al. Postoperative complications in the Ahmed Baerveldt comparison study during five years of follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol. 2016;163:75–82.e73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. •• Janson BJ, Alward WL, Kwon YH, et al. Glaucoma-associated corneal endothelial cell damage: a review. Surv Ophthalmol. 2018;63(4):500–6 Excellent review detailing several studies examining the effect of glaucoma drainage devices on corneal endothelial cell loss. This review provides a good overview of issues concerning corneal endothelial damage after glaucoma surgery and provides a clear summary that compares endothelial cell loss across different device types.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Casini G, Loiudice P, Pellegrini M, et al. Trabeculectomy versus EX-PRESS shunt Versus Ahmed valve implant: short-term effects on corneal endothelial cells. Am J Ophthalmol. 2015;160(6):1185–1190.e1181.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mendrinos E, Dosso A, Sommerhalder J, Shaarawy T. Coupling of HRT II and AS-OCT to evaluate corneal endothelial cell loss and in vivo visualization of the Ahmed glaucoma valve implant. Eye (Lond). 2009;23(9):1836–44.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kim MS, Kim KN, Kim CS. Changes in corneal endothelial cell after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation and trabeculectomy: 1-year follow-up. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2016;30(6):416–25.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee EK, Yun YJ, Lee JE, Yim JH, Kim CS. Changes in corneal endothelial cells after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation: 2-year follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol. 2009;148(3):361–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim KN, Lee SB, Lee YH, Lee JJ, Lim HB, Kim CS. Changes in corneal endothelial cell density and the cumulative risk of corneal decompensation after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation. Br J Ophthalmol. 2016;100(7):933–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Iwasaki K, Arimura S, Takihara Y, Takamura Y, Inatani M. Prospective cohort study of corneal endothelial cell loss after Baerveldt glaucoma implantation. PLoS One. 2018;13(7):e0201342.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. 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):91–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. McDermott ML, Swendris RP, Shin DH, Juzych MS, Cowden JW. Corneal endothelial cell counts after Molteno implantation. Am J Ophthalmol. 1993;115(1):93–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nassiri N, Majdi-N M, Salehi M, Panahi N, Djalilian AR, Peyman GA. Corneal endothelial cell changes after Ahmed valve and Molteno glaucoma implants. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2011;42(5):394–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kim CS, Yim JH, Lee EK, Lee NH. Changes in corneal endothelial cell density and morphology after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation during the first year of follow up. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2008;36(2):142–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hau S, Scott A, Bunce C, Barton K. Corneal endothelial morphology in eyes implanted with anterior chamber aqueous shunts. Cornea. 2011;30(1):50–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Koo EB, Hou J, Han Y, Keenan JD, Stamper RL, Jeng BH. Effect of glaucoma tube shunt parameters on cornea endothelial cells in patients with Ahmed valve implants. Cornea. 2015;34(1):37–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chihara E, Umemoto M, Tanito M. Preservation of corneal endothelium after pars plana tube insertion of the Ahmed glaucoma valve. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2012;56(2):119–27.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Tojo N, Hayashi A, Consolvo-Ueda T, Yanagisawa S. Baerveldt surgery outcomes: anterior chamber insertion versus vitreous cavity insertion. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2018;256(11):2191–200.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Purtskhvanidze K, Saeger M, Treumer F, Roider J, Nölle B. Long-term results of glaucoma drainage device surgery. BMC Ophthalmol. 2019;19(1):14.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Rososinski A, Wechsler D, Grigg J. Retrospective review of pars plana versus anterior chamber placement of Baerveldt glaucoma drainage device. J Glaucoma. 2015;24(2):95–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. •• Wang B, Li W. Comparison of pars plana with anterior chamber glaucoma drainage device implantation for glaucoma: a meta-analysis. BMC Ophthalmol. 2018;18(1):212 This meta-analysis of four studies failed to find a significant effect of pars plana tube placement on corneal endothelial failure when compared with anterior chamber placement. This finding underscores the gap between measured endothelial cell loss and clinically significant outcomes such as corneal endothelial failure.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Coleman AL, Mondino BJ, Wilson MR, Casey R. Clinical experience with the Ahmed glaucoma valve implant in eyes with prior or concurrent penetrating keratoplasties. Am J Ophthalmol. 1997;123(1):54–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sugar A, Tanner JP, Dontchev M, et al. Recipient risk factors for graft failure in the cornea donor study. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(6):1023–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Ward MS, Goins KM, Greiner MA, et al. Graft survival versus glaucoma treatment after penetrating or Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea. 2014;33(8):785–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Almousa R, Nanavaty MA, Daya SM, Lake DB. Intraocular pressure control and corneal graft survival after implantation of Ahmed valve device in high-risk penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea. 2013;32(8):1099–104.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Al-Torbak A. Graft survival and glaucoma outcome after simultaneous penetrating keratoplasty and ahmed glaucoma valve implant. Cornea. 2003;22(3):194–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Iverson SM, Spierer O, Papachristou GC, et al. Comparison of graft survival following penetrating keratoplasty and Descemet’s stripping endothelial keratoplasty in eyes with a glaucoma drainage device. Int Ophthalmol. 2018;38(1):223–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Yakin M, Eksioglu U, Yalniz-Akkaya Z, et al. Outcomes of trabeculectomy and glaucoma drainage devices for elevated intraocular pressure after penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea. 2018;37(6):705–11.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Akdemir MO, Acar BT, Kokturk F, Acar S. Clinical outcomes of trabeculectomy vs. Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation in patients with penetrating keratoplasty. Int Ophthalmol. 2016;36(4):541–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hollander DA, Giaconi JA, Holland GN, et al. Graft failure after penetrating keratoplasty in eyes with Ahmed valves. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010;150(2):169–78.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Knape RM, Szymarek TN, Tuli SS, Driebe WT, Sherwood MB, Smith MF. Five-year outcomes of eyes with glaucoma drainage device and penetrating keratoplasty. J Glaucoma. 2012;21(9):608–14.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Rumelt S, Rehany U. Implantation of glaucoma drainage implant tube into the ciliary sulcus in patients with corneal transplants. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116(5):685–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Arroyave CP, Scott IU, Fantes FE, Feuer WJ, Murray TG. Corneal graft survival and intraocular pressure control after penetrating keratoplasty and glaucoma drainage device implantation. Ophthalmology. 2001;108(11):1978–85.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Lieberman RA, Maris PJ, Monroe HM, et al. Corneal graft survival and intraocular pressure control in coexisting penetrating keratoplasty and pars plana Ahmed Glaucoma Valves. Cornea. 2012;31(4):350–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Aldave AJ, Chen JL, Zaman AS, Deng SX, Yu F. Outcomes after DSEK in 101 eyes with previous trabeculectomy and tube shunt implantation. Cornea. 2014;33(3):223–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Anshu A, Price MO, Price FW. Descemet’s stripping endothelial keratoplasty: long-term graft survival and risk factors for failure in eyes with preexisting glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(10):1982–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Birbal RS, Tong CM, Dapena I, Parker JS, Oellerich S, Melles GRJ. Clinical outcomes of descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty in eyes with a glaucoma drainage device. Am J Ophthalmol. 2019;199:150–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Aravena C, Yu F, Deng SX. Outcomes of descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty in patients with previous glaucoma surgery. Cornea. 2017;36(3):284–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. • Lin SR, Prapaipanich P, Yu F, et al. Comparison of endothelial keratoplasty techniques in patients with prior glaucoma surgery: a case-matched study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2019;206:94–101 This case-control series compares outcomes of DSEK and DMEK in patients who had undergone filtering surgery, tube shunt surgery, or both. The authors report superior visual outcomes and graft survival in the DMEK group, casting doubt on the long-held belief that DSEK was the preferable endothelial keratoplasty technique in eyes that had undergoing filtering or shunting surgery.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Al Habash A, Al Abdulsalam O, Al-Qarni A. Intracorneal hematoma after Ahmed glaucoma valve implant surgery. J Glaucoma. 2017;26(9):e202–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Muthusamy K, Tuft SJ. Iatrogenic limbal stem cell deficiency following drainage surgery for glaucoma. Can J Ophthalmol. 2018;53(6):574–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Sun Y, Yung M, Huang L, Tseng C. Deng SX. Cornea: Limbal stem cell deficiency after glaucoma surgery; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  47. McClellan KA, Billson FA. Late development of localized band keratopathy in relation to a Molteno tube. Cornea. 1989;8(3):227–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kellogg Eye Center, University of Michigan, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA

    Eric Weinlander, Tomas Meijome & Manjool Shah

Authors
  1. Eric Weinlander
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tomas Meijome
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Manjool Shah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Manjool Shah.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part Topical Collection on Diagnosis and Monitoring of Glaucoma

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Weinlander, E., Meijome, T. & Shah, M. The Impact of Glaucoma Drainage Devices on the Cornea. Curr Ophthalmol Rep 8, 159–164 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40135-020-00234-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40135-020-00234-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation