PURPOSE: To compare the impact of trabeculectomy and trabeculectomy with an anterior chamber (AC) maintainer on intraocular pressure (IOP), endothelial cell density (ECD), and central corneal thickness (CCT) in patients with primary open angle glaucoma (POAG). METHODS: The two groups consisted of 36 (trabeculectomy, Group A) and 42 (trabeculectomy with AC maintainer, Group B) patients with POAG. IOP, CCT, and ECD were measured one day prior to surgery, one month, six months, and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: No complications were observed. The mean decrease of mean IOP from baseline to 12 months was statistically significant for both groups (all p < 0.0001), but more significant in Group B (p = 0.01). ECD decrease was significant in both Groups (all p < 0.01), but more significant in Group A (p < 0.0001). CCT decrease was also greater in Group A (p < 0.0001). The surgical procedure's duration was significantly longer in Group B than in Group A (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques seem to be effective and safe options for patients with POAG. Using an AC maintainer might add some safety for the ECD and a bit greater IOP reduction; however, the classic technique, which is of less complexity and less time-consuming, has comparable results.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the impact of trabeculectomy and trabeculectomy with an anterior chamber (AC) maintainer on intraocular pressure (IOP), endothelial cell density (ECD), and central corneal thickness (CCT) in patients with primary open angle glaucoma (POAG). METHODS: The two groups consisted of 36 (trabeculectomy, Group A) and 42 (trabeculectomy with AC maintainer, Group B) patients with POAG. IOP, CCT, and ECD were measured one day prior to surgery, one month, six months, and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: No complications were observed. The mean decrease of mean IOP from baseline to 12 months was statistically significant for both groups (all p < 0.0001), but more significant in Group B (p = 0.01). ECD decrease was significant in both Groups (all p < 0.01), but more significant in Group A (p < 0.0001). CCT decrease was also greater in Group A (p < 0.0001). The surgical procedure's duration was significantly longer in Group B than in Group A (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques seem to be effective and safe options for patients with POAG. Using an AC maintainer might add some safety for the ECD and a bit greater IOP reduction; however, the classic technique, which is of less complexity and less time-consuming, has comparable results.