Literature DB >> 25060848

Intraoperative testing of opening and closing pressure predicts risk of low intraocular pressure after Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation.

F Bochmann1, A Kipfer1, J Tarantino1, C Kaufmann1, L Bachmann1, M Thiel1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess whether intraoperative testing of silicone Ahmed glaucoma valves (AGVs) would identify valves with an increased risk of low postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP).
METHODS: In 30 consecutive cases of glaucoma surgery with AGV implantation, after priming the AGV, we intraoperatively measured the opening pressure A, closing pressure B, and re-opening pressure C using the active infusion pump of a phako-machine. IOP was checked postoperatively on the same day. Low IOP was defined as <5 mm Hg. Intraoperatively measured pressure characteristics of the valve function were analysed for their ability to predict postoperative IOP outcomes.
RESULTS: Opening A, closing B, and re-opening C pressures (mean, (SD)) were 18.4 (5.1), 8.3 (4.7), and 11.7 (4.8)mm Hg, respectively. Ten patients (33.3%) had low IOP. An opening pressure of ≤18 mm Hg predicted low postoperative IOP with a sensitivity (10/10) of 100% (95% CI, 69.2-100) and a specificity (13/20) of 65.0% (95% CI, 40.8-84.6).
CONCLUSIONS: AGVs have a high variability of opening, closing, and re-opening pressures. An opening pressure of ≤18 mm Hg, a closing pressure of ≤10 mm Hg, or a re-opening pressure of ≤11 mm Hg identified all patients with low postoperative IOP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25060848      PMCID: PMC4194337          DOI: 10.1038/eye.2014.168

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eye (Lond)        ISSN: 0950-222X            Impact factor:   3.775


  12 in total

1.  Risk factors of shallow anterior chamber other than hypotony after Ahmed glaucoma valve implant.

Authors:  Hae Young Park; Na Young Lee; Chan Kee Park
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Comparison of polypropylene and silicone Ahmed Glaucoma Valves.

Authors:  Kyoko Ishida; Peter A Netland; Vital P Costa; Lineu Shiroma; Baseer Khan; Iqbal Ike K Ahmed
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 12.079

3.  Characteristics of glaucoma drainage implants during dynamic and steady-state flow conditions.

Authors:  B A Francis; A Cortes; J Chen; J A Alvarado
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 12.079

4.  Surface topographies of glaucoma drainage devices and their influence on human tenon fibroblast adhesion.

Authors:  Lars Choritz; Kaloian Koynov; Giulia Renieri; Keith Barton; Norbert Pfeiffer; Hagen Thieme
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2010-03-05       Impact factor: 4.799

5.  Comparison of safety and efficacy between silicone and polypropylene Ahmed glaucoma valves in refractory glaucoma.

Authors:  Simon K Law; Anne Nguyen; Anne L Coleman; Joseph Caprioli
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 12.079

6.  Thin-film coupled fluid-solid analysis of flow through the Ahmed glaucoma drainage device.

Authors:  Matthew S Stay; Tingrui Pan; J David Brown; Babak Ziaie; Victor H Barocas
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 2.097

7.  Treatment outcomes in the Ahmed Baerveldt Comparison Study after 1 year of follow-up.

Authors:  Donald L Budenz; Keith Barton; William J Feuer; Joyce Schiffman; Vital P Costa; David G Godfrey; Yvonne M Buys
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2010-10-08       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  The Ahmed Baerveldt Comparison Study methodology, baseline patient characteristics, and intraoperative complications.

Authors:  Keith Barton; Steven J Gedde; Donald L Budenz; William J Feuer; Joyce Schiffman
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2010-10-08       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Comparison of silicone and polypropylene Ahmed glaucoma valves: two-year follow-up.

Authors:  Paul J Mackenzie; Robert M Schertzer; Carolyn M Isbister
Journal:  Can J Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 1.882

Review 10.  Glaucoma drainage implants: a critical comparison of types.

Authors:  Kenneth S Schwartz; Richard K Lee; Steven J Gedde
Journal:  Curr Opin Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.761

View more
  3 in total

1.  Is Ahmed Glaucoma Valve Consistent in Performance?

Authors:  Nikhil S Choudhari; Swathi Vallabh Badakere; Ashutosh Richhariya; Sai Naga Sri Harsha Chittajallu; Sirisha Senthil; Chandra Sekhar Garudadri
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 3.283

2.  Safety and Efficacy of Ahmed Valve on Intractable Glaucoma in Saudi Population.

Authors:  Essam A Osman; Norah F Alkheraiji; Mohammad A Abouammoh; Ahmed Mousa; Saleh Al-Obeidan
Journal:  Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-04-29

Review 3.  Conventional glaucoma implants and the new MIGS devices: a comprehensive review of current options and future directions.

Authors:  Inês C F Pereira; Rosanne van de Wijdeven; Hans M Wyss; Henny J M Beckers; Jaap M J den Toonder
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2021-06-14       Impact factor: 3.775

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.