Advertisement

Surgical Technique for Baerveldt Glaucoma Devices

  • Gurjeet Jutley
  • Laura Crawley
Chapter

Abstract

Aims of this chapter:

Notes

Acknowledgements

Professor Philip Bloom at Western Eye Hospital for access to his clinical photos.

Supplementary material

Video 8.1

(MP4 2090262 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Jutley G, Luk S, Dehabadi M, Cordeiro MF. Management of glaucoma as a neurodegenerative disease. Neurodegen Dis Manag. 2017;7(2):157–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lloyd MA, Baerveldt G, Fellenbaum PS, et al. Intermediate-term results of a randomized clinical trial of the 350 versus the 500 mm2 Baerveldt implant. Ophthalmology. 1994;101:1456–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Christakis PG, Kalenak JW, Zurakowski D, et al. The Ahmed Versus Baerveldt Study. Design, baseline characteristics, and intraoperative complications. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:2172–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Christakis PG, Tsai JC, Zurakowski D, et al. The Ahmed Versus Baerveldt Study. One-year treatment outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:2180–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barton K, Gedde SJ, Budenz DL, et al. The Ahmed Baerveldt Comparison Study: methodology, baseline patient characteristics, and intraoperative complications. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:435–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barton K, Feuer WJ, Budenz DL, et al. Three-year outcomes in the Ahmed Baerveldt Comparison (ABC) Study. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(8):1547–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Budenz DL, Barton K, Feuer WJ, et al. Treatment outcomes in the Ahmed Baerveldt Comparison Study after one year of follow-up. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:443–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Christakis PG, Tsai JC, Kalenak JW, et al. The Ahmed Versus Baerveldt Study. Three-year treatment outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2013;120:2232–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Trible JR, Brown DB. Occlusive ligature and standardized fenestrations of a Baerveldt tube with and without antimetabolites for early postoperative intraocular pressure control. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:2243–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Prata JA Jr, Mermoud A, LaBree L, et al. In vitro and in vivo flow characteristics of glaucoma drainage implants. Ophthalmology. 1995;102(6):894–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gedde SJ, Schiffman JC, Feuer WJ, et al. Three-year follow-up of the Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2009;148:670–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    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;153:789–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gedde S. Treatment outcomes in the Primary Tube Versus Trabeculectomy (PTVT) study after 1 year of follow-up. Presented at: American Academy of Ophthalmology Annual Meeting; Oct. 14–18, 2016; Chicago.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lim S. Postoperative complications in the Primary Tube Versus Trabeculectomy (PTVT) study during the first year of follow-up. Presented at: American Academy of Ophthalmology Annual Meeting; Oct. 14–18, 2016; Chicago.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sherwood MB, Smith MF, Driebe WT Jr, et al. Drainage tube implants in the treatment of glaucoma following penetrating keratoplasty. Ophthalmic Surg. 1993;24(3):185–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jutley G, Yang E, Bloom PA. Surgical management of raised intra-ocular tension in the hostile ocular surface: recurrent tube erosion in a patient with systemic sclerosis. BMC Ophthalmol. 2018;18(Suppl 1):222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tarbak AAA, Shahwan SA, Jadaan IA, et al. Endophthalmitis associated with the Ahmed glaucoma valve implant. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89:454–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gurjeet Jutley
    • 1
  • Laura Crawley
    • 2
  1. 1.Oxford University HospitalOxfordUK
  2. 2.Imperial College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations