We have located links that may give you full text access.
CLINICAL TRIAL
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Combined phacoemulsification and trabeculectomy versus trabeculectomy alone: a comparison study using mitomycin-C.
Ophthalmic Surgery and Lasers 1998 September
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of combined phacoemulsification and trabeculectomy (PEM/TRAB) plus mitomycin-C with those of trabeculectomy alone (TRAB) plus mitomycin-C.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed 42 eyes in 38 consecutive patients who underwent combined PEM/TRAB with mitomycin-C. An age-matched control group of 42 patients who underwent TRAB with mitomycin-C during the same time period was randomly selected from 248 consecutive patients. All patients had a minimum of 12 months of follow-up.
RESULTS: Mean preoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) and number of glaucoma medications were similar for the two groups (22.8 +/- 6.9 mm Hg vs 22.9 +/- 6.8 mm Hg, 2.12 +/- 0.8 vs 2.26 +/- 1.0 medications, combined PEM/TRAB vs TRAB, respectively). Postoperative IOP was significantly lower at all follow-up intervals. At final follow-up after a mean of 21.8 +/- 6.0 months, IOP averaged 13.9 +/- 5.1 mm Hg in the PEM/TRAB group and 12.3 +/- 4.7 mm Hg in the TRAB group. Bleb survival was excellent in both groups, although slightly higher in the TRAB group (37 of 42 PEM/TRAB vs 41 of 42 TRAB). Both groups required significantly fewer glaucoma medications at final follow-up (0.38 +/- 0.6 vs 0.5 +/- 0.8, PEM/TRAB vs TRAB). Complications were similar between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: The success rate for combined PEM/TRAB appears to approach that of TRAB alone.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed 42 eyes in 38 consecutive patients who underwent combined PEM/TRAB with mitomycin-C. An age-matched control group of 42 patients who underwent TRAB with mitomycin-C during the same time period was randomly selected from 248 consecutive patients. All patients had a minimum of 12 months of follow-up.
RESULTS: Mean preoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) and number of glaucoma medications were similar for the two groups (22.8 +/- 6.9 mm Hg vs 22.9 +/- 6.8 mm Hg, 2.12 +/- 0.8 vs 2.26 +/- 1.0 medications, combined PEM/TRAB vs TRAB, respectively). Postoperative IOP was significantly lower at all follow-up intervals. At final follow-up after a mean of 21.8 +/- 6.0 months, IOP averaged 13.9 +/- 5.1 mm Hg in the PEM/TRAB group and 12.3 +/- 4.7 mm Hg in the TRAB group. Bleb survival was excellent in both groups, although slightly higher in the TRAB group (37 of 42 PEM/TRAB vs 41 of 42 TRAB). Both groups required significantly fewer glaucoma medications at final follow-up (0.38 +/- 0.6 vs 0.5 +/- 0.8, PEM/TRAB vs TRAB). Complications were similar between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: The success rate for combined PEM/TRAB appears to approach that of TRAB alone.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app