Current Surgical Practice of Trabeculectomy in the United Kingdom (UK National Trabeculectomy Survey 2016)

R. Akash, Yousif Ateeque, A. John, Elahi Babar
{"title":"Current Surgical Practice of Trabeculectomy in the United Kingdom (UK National Trabeculectomy Survey 2016)","authors":"R. Akash, Yousif Ateeque, A. John, Elahi Babar","doi":"10.23937/2378-346x/1410094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective/Purpose: To evaluate the current practice of trabeculectomy among the United Kingdom & Eire Glaucoma Society (UKEGS) members. Design: Cross sectional survey of glaucoma specialists in the UK. Subjects, Participants and/or Controls: Glaucoma specialists’ members of the UK & Eire Glaucoma Society (UKEGS). Methods, Intervention or Testing: A 32 question online survey using a survey monkey web link was sent to the UKEGS members. All non-responders and partial responders were sent a reminder to complete the survey. Main Outcome Measures: Responses relating to the surgical & non-surgical aspects of trabeculectomy surgery. Results: The response rate was 67.6% (142/210) and the vast majority of the respondents (88%) were glaucoma consultants. Eighty percent of the respondents performed > 10 trabeculectomies per year and 70% performed primary trabeculectomy, majority of which (> 2/3) only did this rarely & in cases of late presentation. Progressive visual field loss was the most common indication for trabeculectomy. Majority (48.39%) use sub-tenon’s block without digital massage/ weight/Honan’s balloon. About 89% used antimetabolites of which 99% used Mitomycin C (MMC) and the majority (60%) use this just after conjunctival peritomy. Most (80%) use 0.2 mg/ml of MMC and 58% use this for 3 minutes. Majority (57%) used their own self modified Moorfield’s safe surgery technique & 88% perform a PI during trabeculectomy whereas 12% don’t (in pseudophakes, myopic and where patients are on anticoagulation). Most (56%) use an AC maintainer (1/3 of them always). Only 29% performed phaco trab’ regularly (2/3rd used different sites), 44% never. Conclusion: This survey highlights a varied spectrum in the practice of trabeculectomy. This may reflect some paucity of good evidence to guide uniformity in the various aspects of trabeculectomy. Introduction Glaucoma is the second leading cause of blindness worldwide [1] and the most widely used surgical procedure for glaucoma is trabeculectomy, which creates a guarded fistula between the anterior chamber and the sub-conjunctival space [2]. Although the history of surgical management of glaucoma dates to 1856, when Von Graefe introduced iridectomy as a treatment for acute glaucoma; the history of trabeculectomy is relatively short [3-5]. After the description of trabeculectomy in 1961 by Sugar [6] and by a Greek ophthalmologist Koryllos [7] as guarded penetrating filtration procedure in 1967 and later on works by Cairns, an ophthalmologist in Cambridge, lead to the introduction of the modern Trabeculectomy procedure which he published in 1968 [5]. The term trabeculectomy itself is a misnomer as the trabecular meshwork is not necessarily excised during the procedure. The procedure involves excision of the cornea along with sclera to create a transcleral fistula [8]. As trabeculectomy is the mainstay of surgical treatment of glaucoma; there has been many a refinement and modification of this drainage procedure since its initiation. Refinements have been in the form of instrumentation, suture materials, modern operating microscopes, safer surgical techniques and the use of anti-scarring agents to modulate wound healing and achieve more flow with higher success rate [9-13]. Trabeculectomy, once considered the gold standard for the management of the advanced and progressing glaucoma is gradually being replaced by less invasive ISSN: 2378-346X DOI: 10.23937/2378-346X/1410094 Raj et al. Int J Ophthalmol Clin Res 2018, 5:094 • Page 2 of 11 • Methods, Intervention, or Testing A cross sectional national trabeculectomy survey was created using surveymonkey.com and a questionnaire weblink was distributed to the members of the United Kingdom & Eire glaucoma society (UKEGS). UKEGS is the national body that represents the glaucoma specialists in the UK. The survey link was sent electronically to all the UKEGS members. Reminder emails were sent to nonresponders. The survey consisted of 32 questions which aimed to ascertain the surgical and associated non-surgical peri-operative aspects of trabeculectomy. The first 5 questions focused on the surgeon’s grade and experience, ascertaining their designation and the number of trabeculectomies performed. The next 23 questions focused on current practice methods regarding surgical technique as well as perioperative treatment choices. Remaining questions examined the various complications experienced by surgeons and treatment protocols in penicillin allergic patients. The final group of questions looked at post-operative follow up regimes and audit practice as well as general opinions on the future of trabeculectomy surgery in the UK. Due to the extensive nature of this national survey and the amount of responses generated, it was not and minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS). Glaucoma surgeons are now including various MIGS procedures including iStent, Trabectome and Xen implants for an increasing number of their patients [14-19]. Tube Shunt procedures are also widely practiced throughout the UK and internationally but are usually reserved for resistant cases [20]. There is a large body of literature at present with regards to outcomes and complications of trabeculectomy surgery. While trabeculectomy is quite successful in experienced hands [21] it can also be unpredictable and carry significant risks [22,23]. There are currently no national guidelines on trabeculectomy in the UK or from the European Glaucoma Society (EGS), neither is there any preferred practice pattern on trabeculectomy procedure itself from the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO). In the absence of national preferred practice guidelines, there is bound to be variations in the practice of trabeculectomy. This national survey was done to assess current practice patterns on trabeculectomy surgery done by UK based glaucoma specialists for a UK population base. Therefore, for the first-time national comparisons can be made, and common practices highlighted to enable surgeons to provide a more standardized and uniform service. Please state your designation?","PeriodicalId":91712,"journal":{"name":"International journal of ophthalmology and clinical research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of ophthalmology and clinical research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23937/2378-346x/1410094","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective/Purpose: To evaluate the current practice of trabeculectomy among the United Kingdom & Eire Glaucoma Society (UKEGS) members. Design: Cross sectional survey of glaucoma specialists in the UK. Subjects, Participants and/or Controls: Glaucoma specialists’ members of the UK & Eire Glaucoma Society (UKEGS). Methods, Intervention or Testing: A 32 question online survey using a survey monkey web link was sent to the UKEGS members. All non-responders and partial responders were sent a reminder to complete the survey. Main Outcome Measures: Responses relating to the surgical & non-surgical aspects of trabeculectomy surgery. Results: The response rate was 67.6% (142/210) and the vast majority of the respondents (88%) were glaucoma consultants. Eighty percent of the respondents performed > 10 trabeculectomies per year and 70% performed primary trabeculectomy, majority of which (> 2/3) only did this rarely & in cases of late presentation. Progressive visual field loss was the most common indication for trabeculectomy. Majority (48.39%) use sub-tenon’s block without digital massage/ weight/Honan’s balloon. About 89% used antimetabolites of which 99% used Mitomycin C (MMC) and the majority (60%) use this just after conjunctival peritomy. Most (80%) use 0.2 mg/ml of MMC and 58% use this for 3 minutes. Majority (57%) used their own self modified Moorfield’s safe surgery technique & 88% perform a PI during trabeculectomy whereas 12% don’t (in pseudophakes, myopic and where patients are on anticoagulation). Most (56%) use an AC maintainer (1/3 of them always). Only 29% performed phaco trab’ regularly (2/3rd used different sites), 44% never. Conclusion: This survey highlights a varied spectrum in the practice of trabeculectomy. This may reflect some paucity of good evidence to guide uniformity in the various aspects of trabeculectomy. Introduction Glaucoma is the second leading cause of blindness worldwide [1] and the most widely used surgical procedure for glaucoma is trabeculectomy, which creates a guarded fistula between the anterior chamber and the sub-conjunctival space [2]. Although the history of surgical management of glaucoma dates to 1856, when Von Graefe introduced iridectomy as a treatment for acute glaucoma; the history of trabeculectomy is relatively short [3-5]. After the description of trabeculectomy in 1961 by Sugar [6] and by a Greek ophthalmologist Koryllos [7] as guarded penetrating filtration procedure in 1967 and later on works by Cairns, an ophthalmologist in Cambridge, lead to the introduction of the modern Trabeculectomy procedure which he published in 1968 [5]. The term trabeculectomy itself is a misnomer as the trabecular meshwork is not necessarily excised during the procedure. The procedure involves excision of the cornea along with sclera to create a transcleral fistula [8]. As trabeculectomy is the mainstay of surgical treatment of glaucoma; there has been many a refinement and modification of this drainage procedure since its initiation. Refinements have been in the form of instrumentation, suture materials, modern operating microscopes, safer surgical techniques and the use of anti-scarring agents to modulate wound healing and achieve more flow with higher success rate [9-13]. Trabeculectomy, once considered the gold standard for the management of the advanced and progressing glaucoma is gradually being replaced by less invasive ISSN: 2378-346X DOI: 10.23937/2378-346X/1410094 Raj et al. Int J Ophthalmol Clin Res 2018, 5:094 • Page 2 of 11 • Methods, Intervention, or Testing A cross sectional national trabeculectomy survey was created using surveymonkey.com and a questionnaire weblink was distributed to the members of the United Kingdom & Eire glaucoma society (UKEGS). UKEGS is the national body that represents the glaucoma specialists in the UK. The survey link was sent electronically to all the UKEGS members. Reminder emails were sent to nonresponders. The survey consisted of 32 questions which aimed to ascertain the surgical and associated non-surgical peri-operative aspects of trabeculectomy. The first 5 questions focused on the surgeon’s grade and experience, ascertaining their designation and the number of trabeculectomies performed. The next 23 questions focused on current practice methods regarding surgical technique as well as perioperative treatment choices. Remaining questions examined the various complications experienced by surgeons and treatment protocols in penicillin allergic patients. The final group of questions looked at post-operative follow up regimes and audit practice as well as general opinions on the future of trabeculectomy surgery in the UK. Due to the extensive nature of this national survey and the amount of responses generated, it was not and minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS). Glaucoma surgeons are now including various MIGS procedures including iStent, Trabectome and Xen implants for an increasing number of their patients [14-19]. Tube Shunt procedures are also widely practiced throughout the UK and internationally but are usually reserved for resistant cases [20]. There is a large body of literature at present with regards to outcomes and complications of trabeculectomy surgery. While trabeculectomy is quite successful in experienced hands [21] it can also be unpredictable and carry significant risks [22,23]. There are currently no national guidelines on trabeculectomy in the UK or from the European Glaucoma Society (EGS), neither is there any preferred practice pattern on trabeculectomy procedure itself from the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO). In the absence of national preferred practice guidelines, there is bound to be variations in the practice of trabeculectomy. This national survey was done to assess current practice patterns on trabeculectomy surgery done by UK based glaucoma specialists for a UK population base. Therefore, for the first-time national comparisons can be made, and common practices highlighted to enable surgeons to provide a more standardized and uniform service. Please state your designation?
英国小梁切除术的当前手术实践(2016年英国国家小梁切除调查)
目的/目的:评估英国和爱尔兰青光眼协会(UKEGS)成员中小梁切除术的现状。设计:英国青光眼专家的横断面调查。受试者、参与者和/或对照:英国和爱尔兰青光眼协会(UKEGS)青光眼专家的成员。方法、干预或测试:使用调查猴子网链接向UKEGS成员发送了一份32个问题的在线调查。所有未响应者和部分响应者都收到了完成调查的提醒。主要疗效指标:与小梁切除术的手术和非手术方面有关的反应。结果:有效率为67.6%(142/210),绝大多数受访者(88%)是青光眼顾问。80%的受访者每年进行10次以上的小梁切除术,70%的受访者进行了原发性小梁切除手术,其中大多数(>2/3)很少这样做&在晚期表现的情况下。进行性视野丧失是小梁切除术最常见的指征。大多数(48.39%)使用没有数字按摩/重量/Honan气球的亚榫块。约89%的患者使用抗代谢药物,其中99%的患者使用丝裂霉素C(MMC),大多数患者(60%)在结膜腹膜切开后使用。大多数(80%)使用0.2 mg/ml MMC,58%使用3分钟。大多数人(57%)使用了他们自己改良的Moorfield安全手术技术,88%的人在小梁切除术中进行了PI,而12%的人没有(在人工晶状体、近视和患者正在接受抗凝治疗的情况下)。大多数(56%)使用AC维护器(其中1/3始终使用)。只有29%的患者定期进行超声心动图检查(三分之二的患者使用不同的部位),44%的患者从不进行。结论:这项调查突出了小梁切除术实践中的不同领域。这可能反映出缺乏良好的证据来指导小梁切除术各个方面的一致性。引言青光眼是全球第二大致盲原因[1],青光眼最广泛使用的手术方法是小梁切除术,它在前房和结膜下间隙之间形成一个有保护的瘘管[2]。尽管青光眼的手术治疗历史可以追溯到1856年,当时Von Graefe引入了虹膜切除术作为急性青光眼的治疗方法;小梁切除术的历史相对较短[3-5]。在Sugar[6]于1961年和希腊眼科医生Koryllos[7]于1967年将小梁切除术描述为有防护的渗透过滤程序,以及剑桥眼科医生Cairns后来的工作之后,他于1968年发表了现代小梁切除手术[5]。小梁切除术这一术语本身用词不当,因为在手术过程中不一定要切除小梁网。该手术包括切除角膜和巩膜,形成经巩膜瘘[8]。小梁切除术是青光眼手术治疗的主要方法;自该排水程序启动以来,已有许多改进和修改。改进的形式包括仪器、缝合材料、现代手术显微镜、更安全的手术技术以及使用抗瘢痕剂来调节伤口愈合,并以更高的成功率实现更多的流动[9-13]。小梁切除术,曾经被认为是治疗晚期和进展期青光眼的金标准,现在正逐渐被侵入性较小的ISSN:2378-3446X DOI:10.23937/2378-346X/1410094 Raj等人Int J OphthalmolClin Res 2018,5:094•第2页,共11页•方法,干预,或测试使用surveymonkey.com创建了一项全国小梁切除术横断面调查,并将问卷网络链接分发给英国和爱尔兰青光眼协会(UKEGS)的成员。UKEGS是代表英国青光眼专家的国家机构。调查链接以电子方式发送给所有UKEGS成员。提醒电子邮件已发送给无回复者。该调查由32个问题组成,旨在确定小梁切除术的手术和相关的非手术围手术期方面。前5个问题集中在外科医生的级别和经验上,确定他们的指定和进行的小梁切除术的数量。接下来的23个问题集中在关于手术技术和围手术期治疗选择的当前实践方法上。剩下的问题检查了外科医生在青霉素过敏患者中经历的各种并发症和治疗方案。最后一组问题着眼于术后随访制度和审计实践,以及对英国小梁切除术未来的普遍看法。由于这项全国性调查的广泛性和产生的大量反应,它不是微创青光眼手术(MIGS)。青光眼外科医生现在正在为越来越多的患者提供各种MIGS手术,包括iStent、Trabectome和Xen植入物[14-19]。 管道分流程序也在英国和国际上广泛应用,但通常只用于耐药病例[20]。目前有大量关于小梁切除术的结果和并发症的文献。虽然小梁切除术在经验丰富的手上非常成功[21],但它也可能是不可预测的,并具有重大风险[22,23]。目前,英国或欧洲青光眼协会(EGS)都没有关于小梁切除术的国家指南,美国眼科学会(AAO)也没有关于小梁切除术本身的任何首选实践模式。在缺乏国家首选实践指南的情况下,小梁切除术的实践必然会有所不同。这项全国性调查是为了评估英国青光眼专家为英国人群进行的小梁切除术的当前实践模式。因此,可以首次进行全国比较,并强调常见做法,使外科医生能够提供更标准化和统一的服务。请说明您的姓名?
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信