Vikram Ponnusamy1, Van Nguyen1,2, Jella A An3,4. 1. University of Missouri School of Medicine, Columbia, MO, USA. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Mason Eye Institute, University of Missouri Health Care, 1 Hospital Drive, Columbia, MO, 65201, USA. 3. University of Missouri School of Medicine, Columbia, MO, USA. anja@health.missouri.edu. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, Mason Eye Institute, University of Missouri Health Care, 1 Hospital Drive, Columbia, MO, 65201, USA. anja@health.missouri.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare 6 month outcomes of bleb needling performed in the clinic vs. the operating room (OR) in adult glaucoma patients with failed bleb. METHODS: A retrospective case series of 47 eyes from 41 glaucoma patients who received needling with mitomycin C (MMC) of scarred bleb from prior bleb-forming procedures in clinic (32 eyes) vs. the OR (15 eyes), including trabeculectomy (14 eyes), ExPress shunt (16 eyes), and ab-interno XEN gel stent (17 eyes). The primary outcome was needling success, defined as IOP ≤ 18 mmHg on 0 glaucoma medications without requiring an additional IOP lowering procedure within 6 months after needling. RESULTS: At 6 months, bleb needling success rate was similar when performed in the clinic vs. in the OR (28% vs. 20%, P = 0.54). Success rate was not statistically different in patients with prior trabeculectomy, ExPress shunt, and XEN gel stent (29% vs. 38% vs. 12%, P = 0.26). When comparing clinic vs. the OR needling procedures at 6 months, there was no difference in mean IOP (14.2 vs. 14.9 mmHg, P = 0.73), mean glaucoma medications (1.4 vs. 1.7, P = 0.69), additional IOP-lowering procedure rate (16% vs. 27%, P = 0.37), or complication rate (0% vs. 7%, P = 0.32). CONCLUSION: Bleb needling with MMC in clinic may be a safe and effective way to revise failed bleb after trabeculectomy, ExPress shunt, and XEN gel stent procedures when compared to needling in the OR.
BACKGROUND: To compare 6 month outcomes of bleb needling performed in the clinic vs. the operating room (OR) in adult glaucomapatients with failed bleb. METHODS: A retrospective case series of 47 eyes from 41 glaucomapatients who received needling with mitomycin C (MMC) of scarred bleb from prior bleb-forming procedures in clinic (32 eyes) vs. the OR (15 eyes), including trabeculectomy (14 eyes), ExPress shunt (16 eyes), and ab-interno XEN gel stent (17 eyes). The primary outcome was needling success, defined as IOP ≤ 18 mmHg on 0 glaucoma medications without requiring an additional IOP lowering procedure within 6 months after needling. RESULTS: At 6 months, bleb needling success rate was similar when performed in the clinic vs. in the OR (28% vs. 20%, P = 0.54). Success rate was not statistically different in patients with prior trabeculectomy, ExPress shunt, and XEN gel stent (29% vs. 38% vs. 12%, P = 0.26). When comparing clinic vs. the OR needling procedures at 6 months, there was no difference in mean IOP (14.2 vs. 14.9 mmHg, P = 0.73), mean glaucoma medications (1.4 vs. 1.7, P = 0.69), additional IOP-lowering procedure rate (16% vs. 27%, P = 0.37), or complication rate (0% vs. 7%, P = 0.32). CONCLUSION: Bleb needling with MMC in clinic may be a safe and effective way to revise failed bleb after trabeculectomy, ExPress shunt, and XEN gel stent procedures when compared to needling in the OR.