Skip to main content

Non-penetrating vs Penetrating Surgery of Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Glaucoma

Part of the book series: Essentials in Ophthalmology ((ESSENTIALS))

  • 195 Accesses

Abstract

Non-penetrating procedures have recently gained attention within the scientific community. An at times fierce debate concerning their role as a successor to the gold standard, trabeculectomy, has revolved around its relative effectiveness in short-to medium-term intraocular pressure control. Several controlled clinical trials, comparing both surgical procedures in terms of long-term IOP control, safety, and visual outcomes are underway and some short-to medium-term results are already available [4, 14]. However, we must remember that the goal of any glaucoma surgery is: (a) to reach the “guess” timated target IOP in the individual patient, (b) without threatening the patient’s visual function, and (c) at a sustainable cost for the community. We will discuss what penetrating and non-penetrating surgery can offer.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Carassa R, Bettin P (2003) Viscocanalostomy vs trabeculectomy. A two-year clinical trial. Ophthalmology 110:882–887

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chiou AG, Mermoud A, Jewelewicz DA (1998) Post-operative inflammation following deep sclerectomy with collagen implant versus standard trabeculectomy. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 236:593–596

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Collaborative Normal-Tension Glaucoma Study Group (1998) Comparison of glaucomatous progression between untreated patients with normal-tension glaucoma and patients with therapeutically reduced intraocular pressures. Am J Ophthalmol 126:487–497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. El Sayyad F, Helal M, El-Kholify H, Khalil M, El- Maghraby A (2000) Nonpenetrating deep sclerectomy versus trabeculectomy in bilateral primary open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmology 107: 1671–1674

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gandolfi SA and Cimino L (2000) Deep sclerectomy without absorbable implants and with unsutured scleral flap: prospective, randomised 2-year clinical trial vs. trabeculectomy with releasable sutures. Inv Ophthalmol Vis Sci (ARVO Suppl), S83

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hamel M, Shaarawy T, Mermoud A (2001) Deep sclerectomy with collagen implant in patients with glaucoma and high myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 27:1410–1417

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Haynes WL, Alward WM (1999) Control of intraocular pressure after trabeculectomy. Surv Ophthalmol 43:345–355

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Johnson DH, Johnson M (2002) Glaucoma surgery and aqueous outflow: how does nonpenetrating glaucoma surgery work. Arch Ophthalmol 120:67–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Karlen ME, Sanchez E, Schnyder CC, Sickenberg M, Mermoud A (1999) Deep sclerectomy with collagen implant: medium term results. Br J Ophthalmol 83:6–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kim CY, Hong YJ, Seong GJ, Koh HJ, Kim SS (2002) Iris synechia after laser goniopuncture in a patient having deep sclerectomy with a collagen implant. J Cataract Refract Surg 28:900–902

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kozobolis VP, Christodoulakis EV, Tzanakis N, Zacharopoulos I, Pallikaris IG (2002) Primary deep sclerectomy versus primary deep sclerectomy with the use of mitomycin C in primary open-angle glaucoma. J Glaucoma 11:287–293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lichter PR, Musch DC, Gillespie BW, Guire KE, Janz NK, Wren PA, Mills RP (2001) Interim clinical outcomes in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study comparing initial treatment randomized to medications or surgery. Ophthalmology 108:1943–1953

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Marchini G, Marraffa M, Brunelli C, Morbio R, Bonomi L (2001) Ultrasound biomicroscopy and intraocular-pressure-lowering mechanisms of deep sclerectomy with reticulated hyaluronic acid implant. J Cataract Refract Surg 27:507–517

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Mermoud A, Schnyder CC, Sickenberg M, Chiou AG, H¨¦diguer SE, Faggioni R (1999) Comparison of deep sclerectomy with collagen implant and trabeculectomy in open-angle glaucoma. J Cataract Refract Surg 25:323–331

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Nuyts RM, Greve EL, Geijssen HC, Langerhorst CT (1994) Treatment of hypotonous maculopathy after trabeculectomy with mitomycin C. Am J Ophthalmol 118:322–331

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ravinet E, Tritten JJ, Roy S, Gianoli F, Wolfens-berger T, Schnyder C, Mermoud A (2002) Descemet membrane detachment after nonpene-trating filtering surgery. J Glaucoma 11:244–252

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Sanchez E, Schnyder CC, Mermoud A (1997) Comparative results of deep sclerectomy transformed to trabeculectomy and classical trabeculectomy. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 210:261–264

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Sanchez E, Schnyder CC, Sickenberg M, et al. (1997) Deep sclerectomy: results with and without collagen implant. Int Ophthalmol 20:157–162

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Shaarawy T, Karlen M, Schnyder C, Achache F, Sanchez E, Mermoud A (2001) Five-year results of deep sclerectomy with collagen implant. J Cataract Refract Surg 27:1770–1778

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Stamper RL, McMenemy MG, Lieberman MF (1992) Hypotonous maculopathy after trabeculectomy with subconjunctival 5-fluorouracil. Am J Ophthalmol 114:544–553

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Tan JC, Hitchings RA (2001) Non-penetrating glaucoma surgery: the state of play. Br J Ophthalmol 85:234–237

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. The AGIS Investigators (2000) The advanced glaucoma intervention study, 6: effect of cataract on visual field and visual acuity. Arch Ophthalmol 118:1639–1652

    Google Scholar 

  23. The AGIS Investigators (2001) The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study, 8: risk of cataract formation after trabeculectomy. Arch Ophthalmol 119:1771–1780

    Google Scholar 

  24. The Fluorouracil Filtering Surgery Study Group (1996) Five-year follow-up of the Fluorouracil Filtering Surgery Study. Am J Ophthalmol 121:349–366

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gandolfi, S.A., Cimino, L. (2004). Non-penetrating vs Penetrating Surgery of Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma. In: Glaucoma. Essentials in Ophthalmology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18633-2_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18633-2_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-40608-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-18633-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics