Journal of glaucoma · 2015
Needle bleb revision with bevacizumab and mitomycin C compared with mitomycin C alone for failing filtration blebs.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tai Tak Yee Tania, Moster Marlene R, Pro Michael J, Myers Jonathan S, Katz L Jay
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To report the 6-month comparative outcomes and bleb morphology for needle revision with bevacizumab and mitomycin C (MMC) versus MMC alone of failed trabeculectomy and ExPRESS shunt blebs.
METHODS: Patients undergoing bleb needle revision procedures were enrolled in this study. All patients received a subconjunctival injection of 0.1 mL MMC (0.4 mg/mL) mixed with 0.1 mL preservative-free lidocaine (1%) at the beginning of the procedure. The patients were randomized into 2 cohorts assigned to receive either 1.0 mg (0.04 mL of 25 mg/mL) subconjunctival bevacizumab (treatment group) or 0.04 mL of balanced salt solution (control group) injected in an identical manner posterior to the bleb after the bleb needling. Success was defined as ≥20% reduction in intraocular pressure (IOP) without any IOP-lowering medications. Qualified success was defined as ≥20% reduction of IOP with IOP-lowering medications. Failure was defined as IOP>21 mm Hg, IOP reduction <20%, or need for additional surgery. Bleb morphology was classified using the Indiana Bleb Appearance Grading Scale.
RESULTS: Six months postoperatively, in treatment group (n=29), 57% of patients achieved complete success, and 43% failed. In control group (n=29), 41% of patients achieved complete success, 7% achieved qualified success, and 52% failed. The difference in success rates between the 2 groups was not statistically significant (P=0.35). At 6 months, the mean IOP was 11.52 in treatment group and 12.83 in control group (P=0.45); patients in treatment group were on a mean of 0.16 medications as compared with 0.58 medications in control group (P=0.058). For bleb morphology of treatment group compared with control group, the blebs had less vascularity (0.76 vs. 1.20, respectively, on a scale of 0 to 4, P<0.05) and greater extent (2.68 vs. 2.36, on a scale of 0 to 3, P=0.022) in treatment group.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between the success rates and IOPs at postoperative month 6 between treatment and control groups. Postoperative blebs in the treatment group were less vascular and had greater extent.
METHODS: Patients undergoing bleb needle revision procedures were enrolled in this study. All patients received a subconjunctival injection of 0.1 mL MMC (0.4 mg/mL) mixed with 0.1 mL preservative-free lidocaine (1%) at the beginning of the procedure. The patients were randomized into 2 cohorts assigned to receive either 1.0 mg (0.04 mL of 25 mg/mL) subconjunctival bevacizumab (treatment group) or 0.04 mL of balanced salt solution (control group) injected in an identical manner posterior to the bleb after the bleb needling. Success was defined as ≥20% reduction in intraocular pressure (IOP) without any IOP-lowering medications. Qualified success was defined as ≥20% reduction of IOP with IOP-lowering medications. Failure was defined as IOP>21 mm Hg, IOP reduction <20%, or need for additional surgery. Bleb morphology was classified using the Indiana Bleb Appearance Grading Scale.
RESULTS: Six months postoperatively, in treatment group (n=29), 57% of patients achieved complete success, and 43% failed. In control group (n=29), 41% of patients achieved complete success, 7% achieved qualified success, and 52% failed. The difference in success rates between the 2 groups was not statistically significant (P=0.35). At 6 months, the mean IOP was 11.52 in treatment group and 12.83 in control group (P=0.45); patients in treatment group were on a mean of 0.16 medications as compared with 0.58 medications in control group (P=0.058). For bleb morphology of treatment group compared with control group, the blebs had less vascularity (0.76 vs. 1.20, respectively, on a scale of 0 to 4, P<0.05) and greater extent (2.68 vs. 2.36, on a scale of 0 to 3, P=0.022) in treatment group.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between the success rates and IOPs at postoperative month 6 between treatment and control groups. Postoperative blebs in the treatment group were less vascular and had greater extent.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlkylating AgentsAngiogenesis InhibitorsAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedBevacizumabConjunctivaDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleGlaucomaHumansInjectionsIntraocular PressureMaleMiddle AgedMitomycinNeedlesProspective StudiesReoperationSurgical StomasTrabeculectomyTreatment FailureVascular Endothelial Growth Factor A