advertisement
Abstract #6912 Published in IGR 4-1
A comparison of glaucoma drainage implant tube coverage
Smith MF; Doyle JW; Ticrney Jr JWJournal of Glaucoma 2002; 11: 143-147
PURPOSE: Surgeons may use various materials, including donor sclera, dura, or pericardium grafts to cover glaucoma drainage implant tubes, prior to repositioning conjunctiva. The authors reviewed their experience with these materials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-four eyes with at least 24 months' follow-up status post glaucoma drainage implant surgery were evaluated for signs of tube erosion, as well as patch graft thinning, after initial placement of donor sclera (23), dura (18), or pericardium (23) patch grafts. RESULTS: Sixty-two eyes required no intervention for conjunctival and patch graft melting with subsequent tube erosion. Three cases (two eyes) of erosion requiring reoperation (one dura at six months, one sclera at 15 months, and in the same eye 21 months later, one pericardium) were noted. Significant thinning of the donor patch graft such that the tube was visible beneath intact conjunctiva occurred in six of 23 donor sclera eyes, four of 18 donor dura eyes, and six of 23 donor pericardium eyes. CONCLUSIONS: No material was more prone to melting than another. Donor sclera may be slightly more cost-efficient, but gamma-irradiated pericardium has sterility advantages.
Dr. M.F. Smith, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA
Classification:
12.8.2 With tube implant or other drainage devices (Part of: 12 Surgical treatment > 12.8 Filtering surgery)