| Literature DB >> 33867757 |
Loayza-Gamboa Waldo1, Herrera-Quiroz Julio2, Chávez-Vallejos Jennifer1, Valderrama-Albino Vanessa2, Córdova-Crisanto Luis3, Alvarado-Villacorta Rosa2, Valera-Cornejo Diego Alejandro2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the outcomes of a combined technique (Cyclo Mix) in uncontrolled glaucoma cases.Entities:
Keywords: Cyclodestruction; Glaucoma; Intraocular pressure; Micropulse laser; Transscleral cyclophotocoagulation
Year: 2020 PMID: 33867757 PMCID: PMC8028033 DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1289
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Curr Glaucoma Pract ISSN: 0974-0333
Fig. 1Representative drawing demonstrating the Cyclo Mix technique. First, the probe is set on Micropulse mode (Sub Cyclo) and applied with a continuous movement on the superior hemifield for 8 seconds (Green arrows). After that, the probe is changed to continuous-wave mode (Thermo Cyclo) and applied with 10–20 shots over the inferior hemifield (red circles)
Demographic and clinical baseline characteristic (n = 23 eyes)
| Age (years), | 61.4 ± 16.7 (18–78) |
| Sex, | |
| Female | 9 (69.2) |
| Diagnosis/etiology | |
| Primary open-angle glaucoma | 12 (52.2) |
| Primary angle-closure glaucoma | 4 (17.4) |
| Pseudoexfoliation glaucoma | 2 (8.7) |
| Silicone oil-induced glaucoma | 2 (8.7) |
| Glaucoma after PK | 1 (4.3) |
| Congenital glaucoma | 2 (8.7) |
| Lens status, | |
| Phakic | 9 (39.1) |
| Pseudophakia | 14 (60.9) |
| Prior glaucoma surgery, | |
| None | 17 (73.9) |
| Trabeculectomy | 4 (17.4) |
| Tube shunt | 2 (8.7) |
| Cup to disk ratio, | 0.9 ± 0.06 (0.8–0.99) |
| Baseline number of glaucoma medications, | 2.7 ± 1.5 (0–4) |
| Baseline BCVA, LogMAR, | 0.75 ± 0.59 (0.1–2) |
| Baseline IOP (mm Hg), | 20.3 ± 5.9 (13–38) |
x̄, mean; SD, standard deviation; PK, penetrating keratoplasty; BCVA, best-corrected visual acuity; IOP, intraocular pressure
Considering the total number of patients (n = 13)
Fig. 2Kaplan–Meier plot of the probability of survival based on the criteria of failure that was defined as any of the following: IOP out of target range (5–18 mm Hg) or <20% reduction from baseline for 2 consecutive follow-up visits, additional surgery for glaucoma, or loss of light perception
Fig. 3Line graph depicting the trend in intraocular pressure (IOP; median ± IQR) in mm Hg at baseline and through the follow-up time. *Difference between last from baseline IOP measurement with Wilcoxon rank test (p < 0.0001)
Evaluated characteristics at consecutive follow-up visits (n = 23)
| Eyes, | 23 | 23 | 23 | 23 | 23 | 23 |
| IOP | 20.3 ± 5.9 | 14.5 ± 5.2 | 13.1 ± 6.9 | 13.8 ± 4.2 | 14.3 ± 3.1 | 14.4 ± 3.9 |
| IOP median (IQR), (mm Hg) | 20 (16–24) | 15 (12–16) | 13 (10–16) | 14 (11–16) | 14 (12–17) | 15 (12–16) |
| IOP reduction, % | – | 24.9 | 31.4 | 28.3 | 25.3 | 25.6 |
| Eyes with a >20% IOP reduction, % | – | 52.1 | 69.5 | 69.5 | 62.2 | 62.2 |
| Complete success, % | – | – | – | 47.8 | 52.2 | 30.4 |
| Number of glaucoma medications, | 2.7 ± 1.5 | – | – | 1.0 ± 1.2 | 1.0 ± 1.2 | 1.2 ± 1.0 |
x̄, mean; SD, standard deviation; IQR, interquartile range; IOP, intraocular pressure
Fig. 4Scatter plot of preoperative and postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) after 6 months. Eyes are illustrated as circles. The oblique red line indicates no change of IOP. Circles above the oblique line represent a higher postoperative IOP. Eyes below the line of 18 mm Hg or 20% IOP reduction fulfilled the criteria of qualified success
Fig. 5Number of medications (median ± IQR) at baseline through the last follow-up. *Difference between last from baseline glaucoma medications with paired Student's T-test (p < 0.0001)
Fig. 6Distribution of change in best-corrected visual acuity from baseline to 6 months (n = 23)