Randomized Clinical Trial for Early Postoperative Complications of Ex-PRESS Implantation versus Trabeculectomy: Complications Postoperatively of Ex-PRESS versus Trabeculectomy Study (CPETS).
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Arimura S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4869117 | biostudies-other | 2016
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:We compared complications between Ex-PRESS implantation and trabeculectomy for 2 years after surgery. Sixty-four open-angle glaucoma eyes were randomly assigned to treatment with trabeculectomy (n?=?32) or Ex-PRESS implantation (n?=?32). The primary outcomes were postoperative complications, including reduction of the endothelial cell density (ECD) of the cornea, cataract progression and the frequency of other late postoperative complications. The Ex-PRESS group had significantly greater reduction of postoperative corneal ECD than the trabeculectomy group did at 2 years after surgery (P?=?0.026). Among the corneal areas measured using specular microscopy, the superior area, where the Ex-PRESS tube was inserted, had significantly more severe corneal ECD reduction than the inferior area after 2 years (-17.6% in superior area and -11.7% in inferior area, P?=?0.04). More cataract progression occurred in the trabeculectomy group than in the Ex-PRESS group (P?=?0.04). Twelve eyes (37.5%) in the trabeculectomy group and 4 eyes (12.5%) in the Ex-PRESS group underwent cataract surgery (P?=?0.019). The total number of other postoperative complications between 3 months and 2 years was significantly higher in the trabeculectomy group than in the Ex-PRESS group (P?=?0.02). Although Ex-PRESS implantation might be associated with an increased rate of corneal endothelial cell loss compared with trabeculectomy, it is beneficial for preventing cataract progression after filtering surgery.
| S-EPMC6212395 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of Ex-PRESS implantation (Ex-PRESS) compared to trabeculectomy in the treatment of patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG).MethodsA comprehensive literature search using the Cochrane Methodology Register to identify randomized controlled clinical trials (RCCTs) comparing Ex-PRESS to trabeculectomy in patients with OAG. Efficacy estimates were measured by weighted mean difference (WMD) for the percentage intraocular pressure reduction (IOPR%) from baseline to end-point, and odds ratios (OR) for the complete success rate and postoperative interventions. Safety estimates were measured by OR for postoperative complications. Statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.1 software.ResultsA total of four RCCTs were selected for this meta-analysis, including 215 eyes of 200 patients (110 eyes in the Ex-PRESS group, 105 eyes in the trabeculectomy group). There was no significant difference between Ex-PRESS and trabeculectomy in the IOPR% (WMD = 3.15; 95% confidence interval (CI), -6.17-12.47; P = 0.51). The pooled OR comparing Ex-PRESS to trabeculectomy for the complete success rate at one year after surgery were in favor of Ex-PRESS (OR = 2.93; 95% CI, 1.39-6.16; P = 0.005). The Ex-PRESS procedure was found to be associated with lower number of postoperative interventions (OR = 0.23; 95% CI, 0.07-0.81; P = 0.02) and with a significantly lower frequency of hyphema than trabeculectomy (OR = 0.21; 95% CI, 0.05-0.85; P = 0.03), whereas other complications did not differ statistically.ConclusionIn OAG, Ex-PRESS and trabeculectomy provided similar IOP control, but Ex-PRESS was more likely to achieve complete success, with fewer postoperative interventions. Complication rates were similar for the two types of surgery, except for a lower frequency of hyphema in the Ex-PRESS group.
| S-EPMC3900454 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of EX-PRESS implantation compared with trabeculectomy for uncontrolled open-angle glaucoma.MethodsPertinent randomized controlled trials were identified through systematic searches of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. The efficacy measures utilized were the weighted mean differences (WMDs) for the intraocular pressure reduction (IOPR), the reduction in glaucoma medications, the change of visual acuity, and the relative risks (RRs) for operative success rates. The safety measures utilized were RRs for postoperative complications. The pooled effects were calculated using the random-effects model.ResultsFour randomized controlled trials of 292 eyes were included in this meta-analysis. The WMDs of the IOPR comparing the EX-PRESS with trabeculectomy were -0.25 (95% Cl: -3.61 to 3.11) at 6 month, 0.053 (-4.31 to 4.42) at 12 months, 0.81 (-4.06 to 5.67) at 24 months, and 0.20 (-2.11 to 2.51) at final follow-up. There was no statistically significance for IOPR at any point after surgery. There were also no significant differences in the reduction in glaucoma medications or visual acuity between the groups. The pooled relative risks comparing EX-PRESS with Trabeculectomy were 1.36 (1.11 to 1.66) for the complete operative success rate and 1.05 (0.94 to 1.17) for the qualified operative success rate. EX-PRESS and Trabeculectomy were associated with similar incidences in most complications with the exception of hyphema, with pooled RR being 0.18 (0.046 to 0.66).ConclusionsEX-PRESS implantation and trabeculectomy have similar efficacy in IOP-lowering, medication reduction, vision recovery, and qualified operative success rates. EX-PRESS associated with higher rates of complete operative success and fewer hyphema than with Trabeculectomy. However, these should be interpreted with caution because of the inherent limitations of the included studies.
| S-EPMC4074054 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose:Accumulating studies comparing the efficacy and safety of trabeculectomy and EX-PRESS implantation in open-angle glaucoma (OAG) report inconsistent findings. Thus, we conducted the updated meta-analysis to clarify the issue. Methods:Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected through search of databases PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from their inception up until November 2018. The pooled mean difference (MD) for intraocular pressure reduction (IOPR) and antiglaucoma medication reduction, odds ratio (OR) for operative success, complication, and postoperative intervention was calculated using the random effects model. Results:8 RCTs were enrolled, including 223 eyes in the EX-PRESS group and 217 eyes in the trabeculectomy group. EX-PRESS device implantation had a better IOPR% at 12?months postoperatively (MD?=?8.9, 95% confidence interval (CI)?=?2.5-15.3, P=0.006). There was no statistically significant difference in the antiglaucoma medication reduction (MD?=?6.01, 95% CI?=?-4.13-16.15, P=0.25) and qualified success (P > 0.05). Statistically higher complete success at 1?year postoperatively was found in the EX-PRESS group (OR?=?3.26, 95% CI?=?1.24-8.55, P=0.02). EX-PRESS was associated with a lower frequency of increased IOP (OR?=?0.15, 95% CI?=?0.03-0.93, P=0.04) and hyphema (OR?=?0.20, 95% CI?=?0.05-0.74, P=0.02). Less postoperative intervention was needed in the EX-PRESS group (OR?=?0.43, 95% CI?=?0.20-0.94, P=0.04). Conclusion:For OAG patients, EX-PRESS implantation provided better efficacy in IOP control and complete success at 1?year postoperatively, with fewer increased IOP and hyphema as well as postoperative interventions. EX-PRESS device and trabeculectomy were similar in the qualified success and antiglaucoma medication reduction.
| S-EPMC6778870 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study was to compare surgical and refractive outcomes between phacotrabeculectomy (P-Trab) and phaco with Ex-PRESS (P-Ex-PRESS) for glaucoma at a 6-month follow-up. This prospective randomized controlled trial included 81 eyes; 43 eyes (53%) and 38 eyes (47%) were assigned to the P-Ex-PRESS and P-Trab groups, respectively. Refraction, intraocular pressure (IOP), and best-corrected visual acuity were measured. Refractive change was analyzed using the cylinder's magnitude, and polar analysis assessed the change in the trend of astigmatism [with-the-rule, against-the-rule (ATR), oblique (OBL)], evaluating mean astigmatism in centroid form. All patients showed a statistically significant postoperative decrease in IOP (P < 0.05). There were no differences between the groups in terms of postoperative IOP and visual outcomes or in astigmatism preoperatively or postoperatively (P = 0.61, P = 0.74). In both groups, the mean preoperative and postoperative astigmatism were ATR and OBL, respectively. Preoperative and postoperative centroids in the P-Ex-PRESS group were 0.44 ± 1.32 D at 177° and 0.35 ± 1 D at 8°, respectively, (P = 0.5) and in the P-Trab group were 0.16 ± 1.5 D at 141° and 0.39 ± 1.38 D at 29°, respectively (P = 0.38). Both P-Ex-PRESS and P-Trab showed comparable antihypertensive efficacy in treating open-angle glaucoma over 6 months. Preoperative and postoperative astigmatism did not differ between groups. The groups showed comparable results for final visual acuity.
| S-EPMC7865719 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo compare intraocular pressure (IOP) over time after standard trabeculectomy vs Ex-PRESS implantation in patients with bilateral primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG).DesignProspective, randomised study.Patients and methodsThis study included adult patients with bilateral POAG necessitating surgery. Each patient underwent trabeculectomy in one eye and Ex-PRESS implantation under a scleral flap in the other eye according to randomised contralateral allocations. Efficacy was assessed by IOP values and success rates (IOP threshold and/or need for topical glaucoma medication) during 30 months. Statistical analysis included Generalised Estimate Equation and Cox Survival models, and paired t-tests.ResultsThirty eyes of 15 patients were studied for a mean of 23.6 months (SD, ± 6.9). At the last follow-up visit, mean pre-operative IOP decreased from 31.1 (± 14.2) to 16.2 (± 1.5) mm Hg after trabeculectomy, and from 28.1 (± 9.0) to 15.7 (± 1.8) mm Hg after Ex-PRESS implantation (P=0.001). The mean number of anti-glaucoma medicines prescribed at the last follow-up decreased from 3.7 pre-operatively (both groups) to 0.9 after trabeculectomy vs 0.3 after Ex-PRESS implantation (P=0.001). Complete success rates (5<IOP<18 mm Hg without medications) were higher with Ex-PRESS compared with trabeculectomy (P=0.0024). Postoperative complications were more frequent after trabeculectomy (33%) compared with Ex-PRESS (20%), with four trabeculectomy eyes (27%) needing postoperative interventions, compared with none with Ex-PRESS.ConclusionsTrabeculectomy and Ex-PRESS implantation provided similar IOP control, but the Ex-PRESS group had a lower rate of complications, fewer postoperative interventions, and needed less glaucoma medications.
| S-EPMC3351049 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo compare the effectiveness of postoperative adjunctive use of subconjunctival bevacizumab in altering the outcome of primary trabeculectomy in terms of sustained lowering of intraocular pressure (IOP) and reduction of postoperative bleb vascularization and fibrosis.MethodsA prospective, one center, randomized, placebo-control study. Fifty-nine patients (59 eyes) with uncontrolled IOP under maximal tolerated medical treatment (MTMT) were recruited. A primary trabeculectomy with mitomycin C (MMC) was done and the patients were randomized to either postoperative subconjunctival injection of bevacizumab (1.25 mg/0.05 mL) or balanced salt solution (BSS). Forty-seven patients (47 eyes) completed at least one year of follow up and were included in the study. The main outcome measure was the IOP, and secondary outcome measures include bleb morphology, vascularization, and fibrosis, as well as the need for glaucoma medications and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) needling.ResultsAt 1-year follow up, there was no significant difference between groups for IOP (P=0.65), bleb morphology (P=0.65), and the need for glaucoma medications (P=0.65) or 5-FU needling requirements (P=0.11). However, the bevacizumab group had a higher rate of success results, lower use of glaucoma medications after surgery, and optimal bleb aspect in more patients, but more 5-FU needling procedures required.ConclusionA bigger sample size is needed in order to determine whether the differences found in the bevacizumab group are statistically significant.
| S-EPMC6796091 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo evaluate the effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in early rehabilitation of patients with postoperative complications after cardiovascular surgery.Methods37 patients (25 men and 12 women) aged 45 to 70 years with postoperative complications after cardiovascular surgery were included in the study. Eighteen patients underwent NMES daily since postoperative day 3 until discharge in addition to standard rehabilitation program (NMES group), and 19 patients underwent standard rehabilitation program only (non-NMES group). The primary outcome was the knee extensors strength at discharge in NMES group and in control. Secondary outcomes were the handgrip strength, knee flexor strength, and cross-sectional area (CSA) of the quadriceps femoris in groups at discharge.ResultsBaseline characteristics were not different between the groups. Knee extensors strength at discharge was significantly higher in the NMES group (28.1 [23.8; 36.2] kg on the right and 27.45 [22.3; 33.1] kg on the left) than in the non-NMES group (22.3 [20.1; 27.1] and 22.5 [20.1; 25.9] kg, respectively; P < .001). Handgrip strength, knee flexor strength, quadriceps CSA, and 6 minute walk distance at discharge in the groups had no significant difference.ConclusionsThis pilot study shows a beneficial effect of NMES on muscle strength in patients with complications after cardiovascular surgery. The use of NMES showed no effect on strength of non-stimulated muscle, quadriceps CSA, and distance of 6-minute walk test at discharge.Further blind randomized controlled trials should be performed with emphasis on the effectiveness of NEMS in increasing muscle strength and structure in these patients.
| S-EPMC7572009 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:To compare trabeculectomy with mitomycin-C (MMC) application before versus after scleral flap dissection in terms of corneal endothelial cell loss and surgical outcomes. METHODS:In this double blind clinical trial, patients were randomized to MMC 0.02% application before (group A) or after (group B) scleral flap dissection. The main outcome measure was corneal endothelial cell density; secondary outcome measures included IOP, glaucoma medications, success rates (IOP ?21 and ?18 mmHg, defined as criterion 1 and 2, respectively) and complications. RESULTS:Overall, 99 eyes of 99 subjects including 72 male and 27 female subjects were operated and followed for at least 6 months. The study groups were comparable in terms of baseline variables. Outcomes of surgery were similar at six months in terms of IOP (11.8±5.8 vs. 11.7±5.5 mmHg, P=0.88) and number of medications (0.2 ±0.6 vs 0.1±0.4, P=0.45). Overall success was comparable at months 1 and 3, but higher in group B at month 6 (82.0% vs. 63.3%, P=0.036 for criterion 1 and 78.9% vs. 59.2%, P=0.044 for criterion 2). Hypotony was more prevalent in group B (8.0% versus 2.0%) but the difference was not significant (P=0.38). Endothelial cell density loss (2.2±7.3 vs 0.9±6.3%, P=0.567) was comparable between the study groups. CONCLUSION:Corneal endothelial loss following trabeculectomy was comparable with MMC application before and after scleral flap dissection. The sequences were comparable in terms of postoperative IOP and glaucoma medications. Overall success rate was higher at six months in group B and the rate of hypotony was also higher, although insignificantly.
| S-EPMC4795388 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Use of minimally invasive surgical techniques for lung resection surgery (LRS), such as video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS), has increased in recent years. However, there is little information about the best anesthetic technique in this context. This surgical approach is associated with a lower intensity of postoperative pain, and its use has been proposed in programs for enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). This study compares the severity of postoperative complications in patients undergoing LRS who have received lidocaine intraoperatively either intravenously or via paravertebral administration versus saline. METHODS/DESIGN:We will conduct a single-center randomized controlled trial involving 153 patients undergoing LRS through a thoracoscopic approach. The patients will be randomly assigned to one of the following study groups: intravenous lidocaine with more paravertebral thoracic (PVT) saline, PVT lidocaine with more intravenous saline, or intravenous remifentanil with more PVT saline. The primary outcome will be the comparison of the postoperative course through Clavien-Dindo classification. Furthermore, we will compare the perioperative pulmonary and systemic inflammatory response by monitoring biomarkers in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and blood, as well as postoperative analgesic consumption between the three groups of patients. We will use an ANOVA to compare quantitative variables and a chi-squared test to compare qualitative variables. DISCUSSION:The development of less invasive surgical techniques means that anesthesiologists must adapt their perioperative management protocols and look for anesthetic techniques that provide good analgesic quality and allow rapid rehabilitation of the patient, as proposed in the ERAS protocols. The administration of a continuous infusion of intravenous lidocaine has proven to be useful and safe for the management of other types of surgery, as demonstrated in colorectal cancer. We want to know whether the continuous administration of lidocaine by a paravertebral route can be substituted with the intravenous administration of this local anesthetic in a safe and effective way while avoiding the risks inherent in the use of regional anesthetic techniques. In this way, this technique could be used in a safe and effective way in ERAS programs for pulmonary resection. TRIAL REGISTRATION:EudraCT, 2016-004271-52; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03905837 . Protocol number IGGFGG-2016 version 4.0, 27th April 2017.
| S-EPMC6836654 | biostudies-literature