PURPOSE: To compare the results of subscleral trabeculectomy (SST) augmented with mitomycin-C (MMC) versus Ologen™ implant regarding intraocular pressure (IOP) control and incidence of complications. METHODS:Sixty eyes of 60 patients, who planned to undergo SST, were divided into 2 groups. Group I eyes (included thirty eyes) were operated upon with SST augmented with intraoperative MMC. Group II eyes (included 30 eyes) were operated upon withSST using an Ologen implant. IOP and bleb status, as well as reporting postoperative complications, were followed up. RESULTS: The follow-up period was 12 months. At 12 months postoperatively, the mean IOP was 19.33±3.22 mmHg in group I, and 19.87±4.17 mmHg in group II, with no significant difference between groups. One case in each group had hyphema, and 4 cases in group I and 2 cases in group II had shallow anterior chamber. One case in group I and no cases in group II had blebitis. There was no significant difference regarding the complications between both groups. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the use of the Ologen implant in SST is comparable to the use of MMC with advantage of avoiding the potential dangerous complications related to MMC use in the early (12 months) follow-up period.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the results of subscleral trabeculectomy (SST) augmented with mitomycin-C (MMC) versus Ologen™ implant regarding intraocular pressure (IOP) control and incidence of complications. METHODS: Sixty eyes of 60 patients, who planned to undergo SST, were divided into 2 groups. Group I eyes (included thirty eyes) were operated upon with SST augmented with intraoperative MMC. Group II eyes (included 30 eyes) were operated upon with SST using an Ologen implant. IOP and bleb status, as well as reporting postoperative complications, were followed up. RESULTS: The follow-up period was 12 months. At 12 months postoperatively, the mean IOP was 19.33±3.22 mmHg in group I, and 19.87±4.17 mmHg in group II, with no significant difference between groups. One case in each group had hyphema, and 4 cases in group I and 2 cases in group II had shallow anterior chamber. One case in group I and no cases in group II had blebitis. There was no significant difference regarding the complications between both groups. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the use of the Ologen implant in SST is comparable to the use of MMC with advantage of avoiding the potential dangerous complications related to MMC use in the early (12 months) follow-up period.
Authors: Shivali A Menda; Eugene A Lowry; Travis C Porco; Robert L Stamper; Michel R Rubin; Ying Han Journal: Int Ophthalmol Date: 2014-06-12 Impact factor: 2.031
Authors: Angelo P Tanna; Alfred W Rademaker; C Gustavo de Moraes; David G Godfrey; Steven R Sarkisian; Steven D Vold; Robert Ritch Journal: BMC Ophthalmol Date: 2016-12-29 Impact factor: 2.209
Authors: Salvatore Cillino; Alessandra Casuccio; Francesco Di Pace; Carlo Cagini; Lucia Lee Ferraro; Giovanni Cillino Journal: BMC Ophthalmol Date: 2016-03-05 Impact factor: 2.209