Advertisement

Micropulse laser trabeculoplasty on pseuodexfoliation glaucoma patients under topical prostaglandin analogue monotherapy: 1-year results

  • Olga E. Makri
  • Athina Pallikari
  • Dionysios Pagoulatos
  • Konstantinos Kagkelaris
  • Elli V. Kostopoulou
  • Constantinos D. GeorgakopoulosEmail author
Glaucoma
  • 46 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the effectiveness of a single session of micropulse laser trabeculoplasty (MLT) to lower intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with pseudoexfoliation glaucoma (PEXG).

Methods

In this single-center, one-arm, prospective study patients with PEXG under prostaglandine analogue monotherapy with inadequate IOP control were treated with 360° 532-nm MLT. Patients were evaluated at 1 day, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months post-MLT while they were treated with the same drug regimen as pre-MLT. Mean IOP reduction and percentage of IOP change during the follow-up were calculated. Cases that required any further intervention, like additional hypotensive medication, laser or surgical therapy, throughout the study period were considered failures and removed from the study.

Results

Twenty-seven eyes (27 patients, 17 male) were included in the study. The age of the patients was 72.37 ± 6.29 years and the baseline IOP was 20.41 ± 1.87 mmHg. Treatment with MLT resulted in significantly lower IOP at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after MLT compared to baseline (p < 0.0001 for all comparisons). By the end of the study, 52.17% of the PEXG eyes demonstrated a ≥ 20% IOP reduction compared to baseline. Four eyes (14.81%) did not respond to MLT (three eyes at 3 months and one eye at 6 months after trabeculoplasty) and were considered failures since they required additional intervention.

Conclusions

Micropulse laser trabeculoplasty appears to be an effective method to lower IOP in patients with PEXG up to 12 month of follow-up period.

Trial registration

The study is registered on www.ClinicalTrials.gov with registration number NCT03483402.

Keywords

Intraocular pressure Pseudoexfoliation glaucoma Micropulse laser Trabeculoplasty 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (the Institutional Review Board of the University Hospital of Patras) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Tsang S, Cheng J, Lee JW (2016) Developments in laser trabeculoplasty. Br J Ophthalmol 100:94–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wong MO, Lee JW, Choy BN et al (2015) Systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy of selective laser trabeculoplasty in open-angle glaucoma. Surv Ophthalmol 60:36–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fea AM, Bosone A, Rolle T et al (2008) Micropulse diode laser trabeculoplasty (MDLT): a phase II clinical study with 12 months follow-up. Clin Ophthalmol 2:247–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Scheie HG (1957) Width and pigmentation of the angle of the anterior chamber: a system of grading by gonioscopy. Arch Ophthalmol 58:510–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kent SS, Hutnik CM, Birt CM et al (2015) A randomized clinical trial of selective laser trabeculoplasty versus argon laser trabeculoplasty in patients with pseudoexfoliation. J Glaucoma 24:344–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ahmed IK (2014) Excellent safety profile of micropulse laser trabeculoplasty (MLT) for glaucoma. Glaucoma Today [serial online]. Available from: http://glaucomatoday.com/pdfs/1114_insert.pdf. Accessed 10 May 2018
  7. 7.
    Miraftabi A, Nilforushan N, Nassiri N et al (2016) Selective laser trabeculoplasty in patients with pseudoexfoliative glaucoma vs primary open angle glaucoma: a one-year comparative study. Int J Ophthalmol 9:406–410Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ritch R, Schlotzer-Schrehardt U (2001) Exfoliation syndrome. Surv Ophthalmol 45:265–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schletzer-Schrehardt U, Naumann GO (1995) Trabecular meshwork in pseudoexfoliation syndrome with and without open-angle glaucoma. A morphometric, ultrastructural study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 36:1750–1764Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shingleton BJ, Crandall AS, Ahmed II (2009) Pseudoexfoliation and the cataract surgeon: preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative issues related to intraocular pressure, cataract, and intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 35:1101–1120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Olthoff CM, Schouten JS, van de Borne BW et al (2005) Noncompliance with ocular hypotensive treatment in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension an evidence-based review. Ophthalmology 112:953–961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Melamed S, Ben Simon GJ, Levkovitch-Verbin H (2003) Selective laser trabeculoplasty as primary treatment for open-angle glaucoma: a prospective, nonrandomized pilot study. Arch Ophthalmol 121:957–960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Threlkeld AB, Hertzmark E, Sturm RT et al (1996) Comparative study of the efficacy of argon laser trabeculoplasty for exfoliation and primary open-angle glaucoma. J Glaucoma 5:311–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shazly TA, Smith J, Latina MA (2010) Long-term safety and efficacy of selective laser trabeculoplasty as primary therapy for the treatment of pseudoexfoliation glaucoma compared with primary open-angle glaucoma. Clin Ophthalmol 5:5–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gracner T (2002) Intraocular pressure response of capsular glaucoma and primary open-angle glaucoma to selective Nd:YAG laser trabeculoplasty: a prospective, comparative clinical trial. Eur J Ophthalmol 12:287–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hodge WG, Damji KF, Rock W et al (2005) Baseline IOP predicts selective laser trabeculoplasty success at 1 year posttreatment: results from a randomised clinical trial. Br J Ophthalmol 9:1157–1160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pillunat KR, Spoerl E, Elfes G et al (2016) Preoperative intraocular pressure as a predictor of selective laser trabeculoplasty efficacy. Acta Ophthalmol 94:692–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Martow E, Hutnik CM, Mao A (2011) SLT and adjunctive medical therapy: a prediction rule analysis. J Glaucoma 20:266–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fudemberg SJ, Myers JS, Katz LJ (2008) 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 49:1236Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rantala E, Välimäki J (2012) Micropulse diode laser trabeculoplasty - 180-degree treatment. Acta Ophthalmol 90:441–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee JW, Yau GS, Yick DW et al (2015) Micropulse laser trabeculoplasty for the treatment of open-angle glaucoma. Medicine (Baltimore) 94:e2075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Detry-Morel M, Muschart F, Pourjavan S (2008) Micropulse diode laser (810 nm) versus argon laser trabeculoplasty in the treatment of openangle glaucoma: comparative short-term safety and efficacy profile. Bull Soc Belge Ophtalmol 308:21–28Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chadha N, Belyea D, Lamba T et al (2015) A randomized, prospective comparison of 360 degree selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) vs. 577 nm micropulse laser trabeculoplasty (MLT) in eyes with open-angle glaucoma. American Glaucoma Society 25th Annual Meeting. (Abstract) Available from: http://iridex.com/portals/0/pdf/Chadha-577nm-MLT-vs-SLT-AGS-2015.pdf. Accessed 10 May 2018

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of OphthalmologyUniversity of Patras, Medical SchoolPatrasGreece

Personalised recommendations