Choroidal Effusions after Glaucoma Drainage Implant Surgery

IF 2.8 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY Ophthalmology. Glaucoma Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ogla.2023.03.002
Stephanie Ying AB , Sara J. Coulon MD , Alcina K. Lidder MD , Mary Labowsky MD , Christopher P. Cheng AB , Kateki Vinod MD , Paul A. Sidoti MD , Joseph F. Panarelli MD
{"title":"Choroidal Effusions after Glaucoma Drainage Implant Surgery","authors":"Stephanie Ying AB ,&nbsp;Sara J. Coulon MD ,&nbsp;Alcina K. Lidder MD ,&nbsp;Mary Labowsky MD ,&nbsp;Christopher P. Cheng AB ,&nbsp;Kateki Vinod MD ,&nbsp;Paul A. Sidoti MD ,&nbsp;Joseph F. Panarelli MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ogla.2023.03.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To report the incidence of patients who developed choroidal effusions after glaucoma drainage implant (GDI) surgery and determine risk factors for and outcomes of surgical intervention.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Retrospective case series.</p></div><div><h3>Subjects</h3><p>Medical records of 605 patients who underwent GDI surgery from January 1, 2017 to June 7, 2021 at New York University Langone Health and New York Eye and Ear Infirmary of Mount Sinai were reviewed.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative clinical data were obtained. Multivariate logistic regression<span><span> evaluated the factors associated with the need for surgical intervention. Patient records were analyzed for effusion resolution, intraocular pressure (IOP), </span>visual acuity<span> (VA), and complications across treatment modalities.</span></span></p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>Incidence of choroidal effusion development and need for surgical intervention.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p><span>Choroidal effusions developed in 110 (18%) patients (110 eyes). Surgical intervention to drain the effusion or ligate the implant tube was performed in 19 (17%) patients. The average time to surgical intervention was 47.6 days. Among patients who developed postoperative effusions, risk factors for requiring surgical intervention included history of selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) (</span><em>P</em> = 0.004; odds ratio [OR], 14.4), prior GDI surgery (<em>P</em> = 0.04; OR 8.7), 350-mm<sup>2</sup><span> Baerveldt glaucoma implant placement (</span><em>P</em><span> = 0.05; OR, 4.8), and anterior chamber shallowing (AC; </span><em>P</em> &lt; 0.001; OR, 25.1) in the presence of effusions. The subgroup that required multiple surgeries for effusion resolution had a significantly lower mean IOP at the most recent follow-up compared with those who received medical management only (<em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). A higher percentage of patients who required surgical intervention lost VA at the most recent follow-up compared with patients whose effusions resolved with conservative management (i.e., medical management, AC viscoelastic injection).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Choroidal effusions after GDI surgery resolved with conservative management in most patients. A history of SLT or GDI placement, implantation of a BGI-350, and the presence of a shallow chamber were risk factors for surgical intervention. Although interventions, such as surgical drainage are at times necessary, a better understanding of their impacts can help guide postoperative decisions. The risks and benefits of these procedures must be carefully considered in these high-risk eyes.</p></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><p>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19519,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589419623000601","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective

To report the incidence of patients who developed choroidal effusions after glaucoma drainage implant (GDI) surgery and determine risk factors for and outcomes of surgical intervention.

Design

Retrospective case series.

Subjects

Medical records of 605 patients who underwent GDI surgery from January 1, 2017 to June 7, 2021 at New York University Langone Health and New York Eye and Ear Infirmary of Mount Sinai were reviewed.

Methods

Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative clinical data were obtained. Multivariate logistic regression evaluated the factors associated with the need for surgical intervention. Patient records were analyzed for effusion resolution, intraocular pressure (IOP), visual acuity (VA), and complications across treatment modalities.

Main Outcome Measures

Incidence of choroidal effusion development and need for surgical intervention.

Results

Choroidal effusions developed in 110 (18%) patients (110 eyes). Surgical intervention to drain the effusion or ligate the implant tube was performed in 19 (17%) patients. The average time to surgical intervention was 47.6 days. Among patients who developed postoperative effusions, risk factors for requiring surgical intervention included history of selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) (P = 0.004; odds ratio [OR], 14.4), prior GDI surgery (P = 0.04; OR 8.7), 350-mm2 Baerveldt glaucoma implant placement (P = 0.05; OR, 4.8), and anterior chamber shallowing (AC; P < 0.001; OR, 25.1) in the presence of effusions. The subgroup that required multiple surgeries for effusion resolution had a significantly lower mean IOP at the most recent follow-up compared with those who received medical management only (P < 0.001). A higher percentage of patients who required surgical intervention lost VA at the most recent follow-up compared with patients whose effusions resolved with conservative management (i.e., medical management, AC viscoelastic injection).

Conclusions

Choroidal effusions after GDI surgery resolved with conservative management in most patients. A history of SLT or GDI placement, implantation of a BGI-350, and the presence of a shallow chamber were risk factors for surgical intervention. Although interventions, such as surgical drainage are at times necessary, a better understanding of their impacts can help guide postoperative decisions. The risks and benefits of these procedures must be carefully considered in these high-risk eyes.

Financial Disclosure(s)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
青光眼引流植入术后脉络膜渗出
目的报告青光眼引流植入术(GDI)后并发脉络膜积液的患者发生率,并确定手术干预的危险因素和结果。设计回顾性病例系列。受试者回顾了2017年1月1日至2021年6月7日在纽约大学朗格尼健康中心和西奈山纽约眼耳医院接受GDI手术的605名患者的医疗记录。方法收集术前、术中、术后临床资料。多因素logistic回归评估了与手术干预需求相关的因素。分析患者记录中的积液消退、眼压(IOP)、视力(VA)和各种治疗方式的并发症。主要结果测量脉络膜积液的发生率和手术干预的必要性。结果110例(18%)患者(110眼)出现脉络膜积液。19名(17%)患者进行了引流积液或结扎植入管的手术干预。手术干预的平均时间为47.6天。在术后出现积液的患者中,需要手术干预的风险因素包括选择性激光小梁成形术(SLT)史(P=0.004;比值比[OR],14.4)、既往GDI手术史(P=0.04;OR 8.7)、350-mm2 Baerveldt青光眼植入术史(P=0.05;OR,4.8),以及前房变浅(AC;P<;0.001;OR,25.1)。与仅接受药物治疗的患者相比,需要多次手术才能解决积液的亚组在最近的随访中的平均IOP显著较低(P<;0.001)。与采用保守治疗解决积液的患者相比较,需要手术干预的患者在最近的访问中失去VA的比例更高(即医疗管理,AC粘弹性注射)。结论GDI手术后的脉络膜积液在大多数患者中通过保守治疗得以解决。SLT或GDI植入史、BGI-350植入史和浅腔的存在是手术干预的风险因素。尽管手术引流等干预措施有时是必要的,但更好地了解其影响有助于指导术后决策。在这些高危人群眼中,必须仔细考虑这些手术的风险和益处。财务披露专有或商业披露可在本文末尾的脚注和披露中找到。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ophthalmology. Glaucoma
Ophthalmology. Glaucoma OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
6.90%
发文量
140
审稿时长
46 days
期刊最新文献
Contents Editorial Board Advanced Imaging in Traumatic Glaucoma: Detection of Intralenticular Foreign Body Starstruck Lens: Iatrogenic Rosette Cataract and Its Spontaneous Resolution Unusual Posterior Capsular Pigmentation in Axenfeld–Rieger Anomaly
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1