OPTIMIZING GLAUCOMA MANAGEMENT: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TRABECULECTOMY OUTCOMES WITH FORNIX-BASED AND LIMBAL-BASED CONJUNCTIVAL FLAPS

Main Article Content

Dr. Neelima Sahu
Dr. Arpita Acharya
Dr. Pratima Baisakh
Dr. Dhiren Panda

Keywords

Glaucoma, Trabeculectomy, Conjunctival Flaps, Fornix-Based Flaps, Limbal-Based Flaps, IOP

Abstract

Background: Glaucoma, characterized by chronic optic neuropathy, visual field loss, and elevated intraocular pressure (IOP), necessitates effective management. Trabeculectomy, a pivotal surgical intervention, involves creating a new drainage pathway. This study explores the comparative analysis between fornix-based and limbal-based conjunctival flaps in trabeculectomy, aiming to provide insights into success rates and complications.


Conjunctival Flaps: Fornix-based or Limbal-based: Trabeculectomy's success is intricately linked to conjunctival flap choice, either fornix-based or limbal-based. The study evaluates each approach's advantages, considerations, and objectives to guide clinicians in optimizing surgical interventions for glaucoma patients.


 Materials and Methods: A prospective, non-randomized study conducted from September 2018 to August 2019 at MIMS, Vizianagaram, included 50 cases of primary glaucoma divided into Group A (limbal-based) and Group B (fornix-based). Inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined, and ethical considerations were adhered to.


 Results: The study provides demographic and IOP data, indicating comparable reductions in both groups over the follow-up period. Intraoperative and post-operative complications, visual acuity changes, and bleb evaluations are presented. Group A exhibited higher complications during the post-operative period.


 Conclusion: Fornix-based conjunctival flaps in trabeculectomy demonstrated advantages over limbal-based flaps in ease of fashioning, enhanced exposure, good bleb morphology, sustained IOP reduction, and decreased complications. The study contributes practical insights for ophthalmic surgeons in optimizing patient outcomes and suggests avenues for further research in trabeculectomy procedures.

Abstract 96 | pdf Downloads 46

References

1. Sergio, Claudio, Saccà., Cristina, Cartiglia., Alberto, Izzotti. Glaucoma: An Overview. (2014).29-40. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-401717-7.00004-6
2. James, C., Tsai., Elliott, Kanner. Current and emerging medical therapies for glaucoma.. Expert Opinion on Emerging Drugs, (2005).;10(1):109-118. doi: 10.1517/14728214.10.1.109
3. Toris, Cb. Pharmacotherapies for Glaucoma. Current Molecular Medicine, (2010).;10(9):824-840. doi: 10.2174/156652410793937778
4. Paul, Harasymowycz., Catherine, M., Birt., Patrick, Gooi., Lisa, Heckler., Cindy, M.L., Hutnik., Delan, Jinapriya., Lesya, M., Shuba., David, Yan., Radmila, Day. Medical Management of Glaucoma in the 21st Century from a Canadian Perspective. Journal of Ophthalmology, (2016).;2016:6509809-6509809. doi: 10.1155/2016/6509809
5. Stuart, J., McKinnon., Lawrence, D, Goldberg., Patti, Peeples., John, G., Walt., Thomas, J., Bramley. Current management of glaucoma and the need for complete therapy.. The American Journal of Managed Care, (2008).;14(1)
6. A, Anand., A, Anand., S, Negi., Sudarshan, Khokhar., H, Kumar., Saurabh, Gupta., Gudlavalleti, V, S, Murthy., T, K, Sharma. Role of early trabeculectomy in primary open-angle glaucoma in the developing world. Eye, (2007).;21(1):40-45. doi: 10.1038/SJ.EYE.6702114
7. Harinder, Singh, Sethi., Mayuresh, Naik., Komal, Saluja. Role of trabeculectomy in advanced glaucoma: Whether we stand to consider it a bane or a boon today?. International Ophthalmology, (2019).;39(1):137-143. doi: 10.1007/S10792-017-0797-7
8. A, Anand., A, Anand., S, Negi., Sudarshan, Khokhar., H, Kumar., Saurabh, Gupta., Gudlavalleti, V, S, Murthy., T, K, Sharma. Role of early trabeculectomy in primary open-angle glaucoma in the developing world. Eye, (2007).;21(1):40-45. doi: 10.1038/SJ.EYE.6702114
9. Alex, B., Theventhiran., Gene, Kim., WenJeng, Yao. Fornix-based versus limbal-based conjunctival trabeculectomy flaps for glaucoma. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (2021).;8(8) doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009380.PUB3
10. C., Auw-Haedrich., J., Funk., T., G., Boemer. Long-Term Results After Filtering Surgery With Limbal-Based and Fornix-Based Conjunctival Flaps. Ophthalmic Surgery and Lasers, (1998).;29(7):575-580. doi: 10.3928/1542-8877-19980701-08
11. Behzad, Amoozgar., Ingrid, Chang., Jane, Kuo., Ying, Han. Newer Surgical Options for Glaucoma. Current Ophthalmology Reports, (2017).;5(1):58-66. doi: 10.1007/S40135-017-0121-8
12. Jonathan, Chou., Angela, V., Turalba., Ambika, Hoguet. Surgical Innovations in Glaucoma: The Transition From Trabeculectomy to MIGS.. International Ophthalmology Clinics, (2017).;57(4):39-55. doi: 10.1097/IIO.0000000000000192
13. Carlo, Enrico, Traverso., Karim, F., Tomey., Sobhi, R., Antonios. Limbal- vs Fornix-Based Conjunctival Trabeculectomy Flaps. American Journal of Ophthalmology, (1988).;104(1):28-32. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(87)90289-3
14. el, Sayyad, F., el-Rashood, A., Magdi, Helal., Hisham, M., el-Maghraby, A. Fornix-based versus limbal-based conjunctival flaps in initial trabeculectomy with postoperative 5-fluorouracil: four-year follow-up findings.. Journal of Glaucoma, (1999).;8(2):124-128. doi: 10.1097/00061198-199904000-00007
15. Markus, Avar., J., F., Jordan., M., Neuburger., Diana, Engesser., Jan, Lübke., Alexandra, Anton., Thomas, Wecker. Long-term follow-up of intraocular pressure and pressure-lowering medication in patients after ab-interno trabeculectomy with the Trabectome. Graefes Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, (2019).;257(5):997-1003. doi: 10.1007/S00417-019-04259-5
16. AM, Khan., FA, Jilani. Comparative results of limbal based versus fornix based conjunctival flaps for trabeculectomy. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, (1992).;40(2):41-43