Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Non-intraocular pressure-related revision surgeries after Ahmed glaucoma valve (AGV) implantation in refractory glaucoma

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Ahmed glaucoma valve (AGV) is an effective treatment method for refractory glaucoma (RG), however, additional surgical interventions may be required over the course of follow-up due to complications. Our aim is to investigate the causes, types, and outcomes of revisional surgical interventions apart from revisions aiming IOP control, following AGV implantation in patients with RG.

Methods

The pre- and postoperative month 1–3-6–12 and last visit examination findings of the patients who underwent various surgical revisions of AGV between January 2015 and April 2018 in our clinic were recorded, as well as the interval between AGV implantation-revision surgery and the presence of any other complications necessitating additional surgery. The success criteria were defined on the basis of need for additional procedures.

Results

Twenty-six eyes of 24 patients were included. The follow-up time and the interval between AGV implantation-surgical revisions were median 12 (6–92) and median 9.7 (1–72) months, respectively. The most common complication requiring revision was tube exposure in 15 (57.7%) followed by tube malposition in 11 (42.3%) eyes. Further interventions were required only in one eye with recurrent exposure.

Conclusion

AGV implantation has early and late tube-related complications necessitating revisional surgical interventions; which makes it important to have extended follow-up period for patients with AGV implants. Revisional interventions for AGV implants with tube-related complications are efficient procedures for the majority of patients, but recurrence may occur requiring additional revisions.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

References

  1. Minckler DS, Francis BA, Hodapp EA, Jampel HD, Lin SC, Samples JR et al (2008) Aqueous shunts in Glaucoma. A report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 115:1089–1098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gandham SB, Costa VP, Katz LJ, Wilson RP, Sivalingam A, Belmont J, Smith M (1993) Aqueous tube-shunt implantation and pars plana vitrectomy in eyes with refractory glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 116(2):189–195

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Budenz DL, Feuer WJ, Barton K, Schiffman J, Costa VP, Godfrey DG et al (2016) Postoperative complications in the Ahmed Baerveldt Comparison Study during Five Years of Follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol 163:75–82.e3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Budenz DL, Barton K, Gedde SJ, Feuer WJ, Schiffman J, Costa VP et al (2015) Five-year treatment outcomes in the ahmed baerveldt comparison study. Ophthalmology 122(2):308–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Christakis PG, Kalenak JW, Tsai JC, Zurakowski D, Kammer JA, Harasymowycz PJ et al (2016) The Ahmed Versus Baerveldt study: five-year treatment outcomes. Ophthalmology 23:2093–2102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Tsai JC, Grajewski AL, Parrish RK (1999) Surgical revision of glaucoma shunt implants. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers 30(1):41–46

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Chaku M, Netland PA, Ishida K, Rhee DJ (2016) Risk factors for tube exposure as a late complication of glaucoma drainage implant surgery. Clin Ophthalmol 10: 547–553.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Ma KT, Kim JH, Seong GJ, Jang DS, Kim CY (2014) Scleral fixation of Ahmed glaucoma valve tube tip for adjustment of cornea-touching malposition. Eye 28(1): 23–25

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lavin MJ, Franks WA, Wormald RPL, Hitchings RA (1992) Clinical risk factors for failure in glaucoma tube surgery: a comparison of three tube designs. Arch Ophthalmol 110(4):480–485

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Thieme H, Choritz L, Hofmann-Rummelt C, Schloetzer-Schrehardt U, Kottler UB (2011) Histopathologic findings in early encapsulated blebs of young patients treated with the ahmed glaucoma valve. J Glaucoma 20:433–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bikbov MM, Khusnitdinov II (2016) The results of the use of ahmed valve in refractory glaucoma surgery. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 9(3):86–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Topouzis F, Coleman AL, Choplin N, Bethlem MM, Hill R, Yu F et al (1999) Follow-up of the original cohort with the Ahmed glaucoma valve implant. Am J Ophthalmol 127:27–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Low SAW, Rootman DB, Rootman DS, Trope GE (2012) Repair of eroded glaucoma drainage devices: mid-term outcomes. J Glaucoma 21(9):619–622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Huddleston SM, Feldman RM, Budenz DL, Bell NP, Lee DA, Chuang AZ et al (2013) Aqueous shunt exposure: a retrospective review of repair outcome. J Glaucoma 22(6):433–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Geffen N, Buys YM, Smith M, Anraku A, Alasbali T, Rachmiel R et al (2014) Conjunctival complications related to ahmed glaucoma valve insertion. J Glaucoma 23(2):109–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Smith MF, Doyle JW, Ticrney JW (2002) A comparison of glaucoma drainage implant tube coverage. J Glaucoma 11(2):143–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Trubnik V, Zangalli C, Moster MR, Chia T, Ali M, Martinez P et al (2015) Evaluation of risk factors for Glaucoma drainage device-related erosions: a retrospective case-control study. J Glaucoma 24(7):498–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Koval MS, El Sayyad FF, Bell NP, Chuang AZ, Lee DA, Hypes SM, Grover DS, Baker LA, Huddleston SM, Budenz DL, Feldman RM (2013) Risk factors for tube shunt exposure: a matched case-control study. J Ophthalmol 2013:196215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Byun YS, Lee NY, Park CK (2009) Risk factors of implant exposure outside the conjunctiva after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation. Jpn J Ophthalmol 53(2):114–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee EK, Yun YJ, Lee JE, Yim JH, Kim CS (2009) Changes in corneal endothelial cells after Ahmed Glaucoma Valve Implantation: 2-Year Follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol 148(3):361–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim KN, Lee SB, Lee YH, Lee JJ, Lim HB, Kim CS (2016) Changes in corneal endothelial cell density and the cumulative risk of corneal decompensation after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation. Br J Ophthalmol 100(7):933–938

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors have no proprietary interest and no financial support was received.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Asli Kirmaci Kabakci.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

Approval of Research Ethics Committee: University of Health Sciences Gaziosmanpasa Taksim Training and Research Hospital.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kirmaci Kabakci, A., Solmaz, B., Basarir, B. et al. Non-intraocular pressure-related revision surgeries after Ahmed glaucoma valve (AGV) implantation in refractory glaucoma. Int Ophthalmol 41, 3533–3538 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-021-01920-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-021-01920-z

Keywords

Navigation