Dataset Information

Tube Revision Outcomes for Exposure with Different Repair Techniques

ABSTRACT: Purpose The aim of this study was to report our experience with eyes that presented with an initial GDD exposure and their subsequent outcome in terms of re-exposure. Methods A retrospective review of charts of 42 patients (43 eyes) who presented with a GDD exposure during the period 2008–2015 in a tertiary eye care center was performed. Demographic data, past ocular history, pre-operative and post-operative information including the surgical technique of GDD surgery and exposure repair were recorded. The patients were followed for further exposure to the date of the last follow-up clinic visit. For each type of repair technique, details were collected on risk and timing of GDD exposure. The baseline features of eyes that had further exposure after initial exposure were compared to eyes without further exposure. Results Forty-three eyes were identified which had repair after an initial exposure. The mean ± SD age was 54 ± 27 years. Of the GDDs, Ahmed FP7 was performed in 31 eyes, Ahmed FP8 in two eyes, Ahmed S2 in five eyes, Krupin valve in two eyes and Baerveldt 350 GDD in three eyes. The methods of repair and the relative risk [95% CI] of re-exposure were: conjunctival closure only (n=4; RR=2.10 [0.84–5.23]); repair with patch graft and conjunctival repair (n=18), RR=1.24 [0.51–3.01]; tube repositioning, use of patch graft and conjunctival repair (n=14), RR=1.0; tube removal with replacement in a different quadrant, patch graft and conjunctival repair (n=3), RR=1.87 [0.64–5.48]. After the first exposure, 18 eyes had a second re-exposure, four eyes had a third re-exposure, and 1 eye had a fourth exposure. Conclusions The GDD exposure rates at our institution are consistent with other reports. Lack of a patch graft for repair is associated with a two-fold risk of subsequent re-exposure.

SUBMITTER: Alawi A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7537842 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo compare the long-term safety and efficacy of amniotic membrane-umbilical cord (AM-UC) and pericardium patch grafts in reducing glaucoma shunt tube exposure.DesignMulticenter, prospective, randomized clinical trial.ParticipantsAdults with uncontrolled glaucoma undergoing glaucoma drainage device (GDD) implantation.MethodsPatients were randomized to receive GDD with either AM-UC or pericardium patch grafts to cover GDD tubes. Patients were followed up clinically with anterior segment (AS) OCT to assess patch graft stability and host-tissue integration prospectively.Main outcome measuresTube exposure, graft thinning, and graft-related complications.ResultsA total of 81 eyes of 81 patients (50 women, 31 men) with a mean age of 67±13 years underwent GGD implantation using Baerveldt (n = 72) or Ahmed valve (n = 9). Tubes were inserted in the anterior chamber (n = 71), sulcus (n = 6), or pars plana (n = 4). Tube ligation was performed with Baerveldt GDD along with fenestration (n = 51) or orphan trabeculectomy (n = 21). Tubes were covered with AM-UC (n = 41) or pericardium (n = 40). The mean follow-up time was 29±8 months (range, 13-40 months). Tube exposure occurred in 1 eye (2%) in the AM-UC group at 3 months and in 2 eyes (5%) in the pericardium group at 2 and 6 months (P = 0.54). Sequential AS OCT showed better host-tissue integration and significantly less graft thinning in the AM-UC group. Early graft thinning (≤3 months) occurred in 5 eyes (12%) in the AM-UC group and in 17 eyes (43%) in the pericardium group (P = 0.002). Late thinning occurred in 2 eyes (5%) and 11 eyes (28%) in the AM-UC and pericardium groups, respectively (P = 0.007). Graft translucency and cosmetic appearance of the AM-UC graft were superior to those of the pericardium graft. No evidence of graft rejection or infection was associated with the patch grafts in either group.ConclusionsAmniotic membrane-umbilical cord grafts are well tolerated and offer an alternative to pericardium for safe and stable tube shunt coverage. Its high-tensile strength, low immunogenicity, and excellent host-tissue integration significantly reduced graft thinning.

Project description:ImportanceSutureless gastroschisis repair offers an alternative to the traditional sutured method and has been associated with decreased intubation time. Published study results are inconsistent regarding the advantages of sutureless closure.ObjectiveTo compare the clinical outcomes of sutureless and sutured gastroschisis repair.Design, setting, and participantsA single-center cohort review was performed of all consecutive patients (n = 97) who underwent gastroschisis repair from February 1, 2007, to April 30, 2017, at the University of California, San Francisco. Patients' medical records were evaluated for clinical characteristics and outcomes. Cases with incomplete data during initial hospitalization were excluded.Main outcomes and measuresLength of hospital stay, time to full enteral feeds, total parenteral nutrition duration, days requiring intravenous analgesia, days intubated, wound infection rate, antibiotic treatment duration, rate of umbilical hernias that required an operation, and readmission rate.ResultsIn total, 97 patients (47 [48%] were female and 50 [52%] were male with a mean [SD] age of 2.8 [2.8] days) underwent gastroschisis repair, of which 7 were excluded for incomplete medical record. Of the 90 patients included in the study, 50 (56%) underwent sutured closure and 40 (44%) underwent sutureless closure. No statistical difference was found between the sutured and sutureless groups in length of hospital stay (mean [SD] days, 43.9 [40.4] vs 36.7 [21.2]; P = .71), time to full enteral feeds (mean [SD] days, 31.4 [20.2] vs 27.9 [17.3]; P = .22), total parenteral nutrition duration (mean [SD] days, 33.5 [29.8] vs 27.4 [18.2]; P = .23), wound infection rates (14 [28%] vs 10 [25%]; P = .81), and readmission rates (5 [10%] vs 7 [18%]; P = .36). The sutureless group, compared with the sutured group, had substantially fewer days receiving antibiotics (mean [SD], 7.2 [6.4] vs 12.4 [13.2]; P = .003), fewer days intubated (mean [SD], 2.8 [3.3] vs 6.8 [1.3]; P = .001), fewer days receiving intravenous analgesia (mean [SD], 4.2 [4.0] vs 7.1 [4.5]; P = .003), and fewer patients that required silo reduction (25 [63%] vs 48 [96%]; P < .001). Sutureless closures, compared with the sutured technique, had considerably more umbilical hernias requiring surgical repair (5 [13%] vs 0; P = .02).Conclusions and relevanceSutureless repair of gastroschisis appears to be associated with a statistically significant reduction in mechanical ventilation duration and pain medication requirements but may increase umbilical hernia risk. Multicenter randomized clinical trials are necessary to determine the true advantages of the sutureless approach.

Dataset Information

Tube Revision Outcomes for Exposure with Different Repair Techniques

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets